This letter (http://www.civilairportal.com/docs/Report%20to%20the%20National%20Commander%20and%20Members.pdf) from the Iowa Wing commander, addressed to Maj Gen Pineda, has been turning heads and generating a lot of discussion on both CadetStuff (http://forums.cadetstuff.org/viewtopic.php?t=6490) and CivilAirPortal (http://www.civilairportal.com).
It brings up some incredibly fresh thinking for how a CAP wing (and CAP as a whole) could or should be run. And in Iowa, it has been run like this.
It's a long read... about 14 pages, but it is well worth reading the entire document if you ask me.
Comments? Thoughts?
The commander of the Iowa Wing has a great point. Wings that expand their relationship with the National Guard or other military affiliations will likely prosper and succeed.
P.S. If you have time this is definitely worth reading.
I was forwarded an email on 17 August 2006 that might show you some of CAP leadership's thinking. In the wake of hurricane Katrina I believe that though we are the USAF Auxiliary, we will need to work with the US Army in future responses to large scale DR and HLS missions.
I've cut and pasted the body of the email only leaving out email addresses and phone numbers in the headers and footers for privacy reasons.
"General Bowling and General Pineda,
At your request, we were able to brief Maj Gen Bell today. He is the Commanding General for the US Army's 81st Regional Readiness Command and his headquarters is in Birmingham, AL. The "CAP 101" briefing with heavy emphasis on CAP's operational capabilities (to include SDIS and ARCHER) went very well. General Bell asked several good questions indicating he is very interested in using CAP to support the 81st RRC's mission in the future. General Bell is responsible for providing Army support for the southeastern part of the United States. He specifically mentioned they were responsible for providing personnel and equipment to support hurricane relief efforts (and other disasters) all across the southeast. He expressed a lot of interest in using CAP's aerial reconnaissance capabilities to help the 81st pick the best routes to quickly deploy into a disaster area. General Bell's paraphrased comments after the briefing were...I had no idea that Civil Air Patrol was more than a youth program...CAP really has numerous outstanding operational capabilities! He concluded the meeting by thanking us for coming and saying he was going to put his G3 (Operations Chief) in touch with us so we can begin working together.
81st RRC website:
http://www.armyreserve.army.mil/USARC/RRC/0081RRC/0081_RRC_Overview.htm
General Bowling, I would like to thank you for paving the way for this very productive meeting.
V/R
John A. Salvador"
Director of Missions, HQ CAP
Quote from: mawr on September 01, 2006, 09:08:25 PM
I was forwarded an email on 17 August 2006 that might show you some of CAP leadership's thinking. In the wake of hurricane Katrina I believe that though we are the USAF Auxiliary, we will need to work with the US Army in future responses to large scale DR and HLS missions.
I've cut and pasted the body of the email only leaving out email addresses and phone numbers in the headers and footers for privacy reasons.
"General Bowling and General Pineda,
Actually, 1st Army, Commanded by LTG Honore' is responsible for all disater relief efforts east of the Mississippi. MG Bell is a Reserve General and the 81st RRC supports operational Reserve units in the southeastern US
At your request, we were able to brief Maj Gen Bell today. He is the Commanding General for the US Army's 81st Regional Readiness Command and his headquarters is in Birmingham, AL. The "CAP 101" briefing with heavy emphasis on CAP's operational capabilities (to include SDIS and ARCHER) went very well. General Bell asked several good questions indicating he is very interested in using CAP to support the 81st RRC's mission in the future. General Bell is responsible for providing Army support for the southeastern part of the United States. He specifically mentioned they were responsible for providing personnel and equipment to support hurricane relief efforts (and other disasters) all across the southeast. He expressed a lot of interest in using CAP's aerial reconnaissance capabilities to help the 81st pick the best routes to quickly deploy into a disaster area. General Bell's paraphrased comments after the briefing were...I had no idea that Civil Air Patrol was more than a youth program...CAP really has numerous outstanding operational capabilities! He concluded the meeting by thanking us for coming and saying he was going to put his G3 (Operations Chief) in touch with us so we can begin working together.
81st RRC website:
http://www.armyreserve.army.mil/USARC/RRC/0081RRC/0081_RRC_Overview.htm
General Bowling, I would like to thank you for paving the way for this very productive meeting.
V/R
John A. Salvador"
Director of Missions, HQ CAP
I read the letter and tink its great. I wish our state had an agreement with our state National Guard. I am in the Guard myself and know thta we dont
Since this is obviously a shared, but different audience from Cadetstuff and Capblog, I'll put here what I posted there:
************************
Synopsis:
We're working with the IANG - it was a PITA to get started, but once we learned our place and figured out how to stop wasting people's time, we got some real effective things moving forward.
******
I applaud their efforts as well, and we are discussing with some of their leaders, as well as their LO, how to emulate and expand on what they have done here in ILWG.
They have been able to accomplish and maintain a lot of things that we in ILWG have managed to screw up repeatedly - one prime example would be the Mississippi River flights they do on a regular basis - we managed to mess up the relationship with the state ES people on our side of the river, and years later we are still not back in the air, and this is in spite of the fact that one of the IEMA decision makers on this is also in CAP.
It needs to be said, though, that IAWG's numbers are fairly small for the size of their state - I understand about 250-300 members total. We've got that many in just my Group.
In fact, in a state that is only about 2% smaller than Illinois, they have only 23% as many people as IL. So I'll bet these guys spend a lot of time driving.
My point here is that the smaller the group of people, the easier it is to turn them all in one direction.
And perhaps they have hit on the solution. Its possible that the sheer hassle of the travel has weeded many of the GOB's and naysayers, and by default resulted in a leaner, more committed force. I understand they are pretty tight with the Red Cross as well.
A regular discussion by many people in ILWG
is that of the 12-1500 members (depending on renewal cycle) there's probably only about 300 who are actually fully engaged, and of those, maybe 100 that are worth anything in a real ES situation.
Which is still saying SOMETHING to our ES customers - I can give you 100 skilled people for the cost of gas.
However it's not where we should be.
Centralization certainly has its benefits, especially in a wing with manageable membership levels, like Iowa.
In states with larger CAP memberships -- or even simply more congested traffic!-- the centralization won't work as well.
Furthermore, what happens when a natural disaster or HLS event cuts off access to the central 'brain' of the organization??
In these larger wings, groups can (and often do) bridge this gap....when the wing staffs are mature enough not to feel threatened by officers of similar expertise to their own....and when the squadrons learn to stop resenting supervision.
I once heard a group commander explain to his unit commanders that this was not the Royal Navy of the Napoleonic Wars, and they were not Horatio Hornblower or Jack Aubrey, frigate captains with near total autonomy from HQ!!
This 'team' concept was not well received!
I was following a big discussion on "The Portal" about Iowa Wing's new way of doing things. I know there was a large document floating around the internet from their Wing Commander that explained a lot of what they were doing and i didn't see any discussion of that here. does anybody have that document to post and to discuss?
Here you go . . .
I'll go ahead and give this thread a bump. This was one of the biggest conversations over on the Portal, and I guess we can resume it here (mods willing).
As Lt Col Critelli said in one of his posts over on the Portal, a small delegation from Nebraska Wing visited the October Iowa WTA. I was one of them, and I'd like to share some very basic thoughts and observations.
You have to approach the whole Iowa reorganization with an open mind. To be sure, there are a couple of things they're doing over there that don't make me entirely comfortable, but I have to say that they are for the most part on the right track.
Is the Iowa system perfect? Nope (and the leadership there knows this which is why they're continually making adjustments and changes). But let me say this. I've been around CAP for about 20 years now and Iowa is a heck of a lot closer to perfect than I've ever seen in CAP. Period.
CAP has always suffered, IMO, because it never seems to reach its great potential. Sadly, it seldom even comes close, at least in these parts. In Iowa Wing, they've taken concrete steps to move CAP toward its true potential as an organization that serves the country, and I applaud them for it.
I also want to say that it's been years and years since I've seen such a large group of people who are so enthusiastic about CAP, and so proud and professional in their demeanor. Our small delegation was met with open arms from litterally everyone we met that day. The enthusiasm and esprit these people have for what they're doing was awesome to see. We would do well to replicate it elsewhere in the organization.
GO IOWA!! :clap:
I've long argued that CAP has missed the HLS boat because we tried to be all things to all people while never really defining our mission and relationships with the military. "Performing Missions for America" really doesn't do it because we don't know what those missions are for the large part.
Partnering with the Guard (Army and Air) is the best proactive move I've seen in 17 years and I applaud Iowa and other wings that move in tha direction.
Quote from: NEBoom on November 02, 2006, 02:01:22 AM
As Lt Col Critelli said in one of his posts over on the Portal, a small delegation from Nebraska Wing visited the October Iowa WTA. I was one of them, and I'd like to share some very basic thoughts and observations.
You have to approach the whole Iowa reorganization with an open mind. To be sure, there are a couple of things they're doing over there that don't make me entirely comfortable, but I have to say that they are for the most part on the right track.
Is the Iowa system perfect? Nope (and the leadership there knows this which is why they're continually making adjustments and changes). But let me say this. I've been around CAP for about 20 years now and Iowa is a heck of a lot closer to perfect than I've ever seen in CAP. Period.
I think the Iowa effort is indeed something we should all look at and see how it can be adapted to our local situation.
A lot depends on the willingness of the National Guard to get involved.
And, in the larger wings (NY, TX, CA) this may need to be 'regionalized'....maybe for a group, or a cluster of groups.
There was some pretty good discussion there about how this could apply elsewhere. My group for instance is roughly the size of Iowa & has about a thousand members. If we were to bring something like this concept over, it's a no brainer it'd be executed at the Gp level w/ Wg supervision. We also have some good Wg centralized programs working here & I'd like to see those continue as best as possible but be tied in to some extent also.
I too am uncomfortable with a couple aspects of what they're doing over there. As most of you know, moving CAP to the NG Bureau was considered recently by Air Staff & shot down. I agree with that decision, because while we do need to work extensively with the Army side on disaster response & other such missions, we also need the AF & that cultural identity. A move to 1AF was also considered & shot down. That made much more sense to me. They have AFRCC, DR & HLS missions, and control mostly ANG units (Fighter Wings mostly). If I were going to take Iowa's program nation wide it'd be partnered w/ 1AF rather than individual states, which I think gives you the best of all worlds.
This is all pretty far out there & probably wouldn't be worth considering if Iowa weren't out there doing it in the real world already.
I'll probably regret doing this but here goes...
In forming the IAWG program, our due diligence indicated that we needed a partner within state government in order to achieve our goal of maintaining a constant flow of missions and funding. Several agencies and departments were considered. As you know we decided that the National Guard would be our partner.
In researching the Guard we were shocked to see the parallels which developed between the Guard and the Patrol. For example, the Guard has a US Code Title 10 military mission when operating under presidential orders. CAP also has a USCode Title 10 military mission when operating under orders from any federal agency or department ("A" missions). At all other times the Guard operates under USCode Title 32 status which forms the basis for its state based missions involving support to civilian autorities. So it is with the Patrol. When not operating under Title 10 ("A" missions) the Patrol operates under Title 36 which defines our emergency services/disaster relief status. Both the Guard and the Patrol are dual status organizations. This fact alone has proven to be a kindred link between the two organizations. Culturally and politically (within the state as well as the federal government) the Guard and Patrol are extremely compatible. That's why we chose the Guard as our partner.
Nick Critelli
Chief of Staff -- Iowa Wing.
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on November 02, 2006, 05:18:58 AM
I'll probably regret doing this but here goes...
In forming the IAWG program, our due diligence indicated that we needed a partner within state government in order to achieve our goal of maintaining a constant flow of missions and funding. Several agencies and departments were considered. As you know we decided that the National Guard would be our partner.
In researching the Guard we were shocked to see the parallels which developed between the Guard and the Patrol. For example, the Guard has a US Code Title 10 military mission when operating under presidential orders. CAP also has a USCode Title 10 military mission when operating under orders from any federal agency or department ("A" missions). At all other times the Guard operates under USCode Title 32 status which forms the basis for its state based missions involving support to civilian autorities. So it is with the Patrol. When not operating under Title 10 ("A" missions) the Patrol operates under Title 36 which defines our emergency services/disaster relief status. Both the Guard and the Patrol are dual status organizations. This fact alone has proven to be a kindred link between the two organizations. Culturally and politically (within the state as well as the federal government) the Guard and Patrol are extremely compatible. That's why we chose the Guard as our partner.
Nick Critelli
Chief of Staff -- Iowa Wing.
Sir, the results I've read about have been impressive.
A lot of factors would impact how readily your solution could be applied in another wing....but the important thing for the present is that it's working for Iowa Wing..... I wish you continued success in the effort!
Thanks for your kind remarks. It's not been without problems. We've changed a culture and that always brings discord. We've debugged it and we're up and running.
There is a very noticible change of spirit. The negativity has gone and excitement and enthusiam has surfaced. I keep reminding myself that people join the Patrol out of a desire to help their community. These are fundamentally very good people who want to put back into society rather than take away. They are happiest when they are giving back and seeing some appreciation for it. If that doesn't happen they can get downright negative and start griping and complaining about everything. The solution: Keep them fulfilled by doing good and eciting things as a part of a team.
NC
The only problem I have with the Iowa Wing plan.....is that if they try to force it on to every wing, and some wings may not have the same state level support.
Iowa is able to do such wonderful stuff because the NG is willing to pony up the money and facilities to support it.
Not everystate can or is willing to do that.
But other than than...I think it is a great way of doing business.
I learned long ago that "forcing" anything or anybody doesn't work.
The number one lesson from IAWG that I would like everyone to learn is that it is all about good, positive and strong relationships. If you have them you can do just about everything. If you have no relationships nothing will get done. If you have bad or negative relationships you are doomed to failure. The IAWG had all three. As we built positive relationships we found that the negative ones were bringing us down so we had to take steps to eliminate them. Negativism was the single worse thing we had in our Wing. We still have some but we hope that by our actions and success those who harbor them will begin to change. As we say, lead, follow or stand down. Some have stood down and transferred to other Wings. We respect their choice.
NC
I think there's certainly a lot of great ideas and lessons to be learned from the Iowa Wing model. There was definitely some great and creative thinking behind setting this up. I love the idea of aligning with the National Guard.
As someone pointed out earlier in this discussion thread, there are great similiarities between the Guard and CAP, in both formal/legal matters and how we do business. In addition, within the Air Force, I think CAP, as a whole, would do better being aligned under the AF Reserve Command, rather than Air Education Training Command.
Good discussion!
Did they want to leave, or were they told diplomatically to "Don't let the door hit you on the way out!" ???
Quote from: Ricochet13 on November 01, 2006, 04:20:08 PM
Here you go . . .
Cool -- I hadn't seen that "25 questions about Iowa Wing" document before.
the Iowa Wing model is spread over several threads and very interesting.Atleast to me it is.)
If the model is to become the future of CAP as a whole we are looking at a multiyear transformation. Once all the major players signed off on it it would take at least 5 years to get all 52 wings moving into the new CAP. Some would move faster than others.
I of course am all for it. Getting the NB, BoG, AF, ant NGB to give the affirmative nod, that is another adventure in itself
Implementing the Iowa model everywhere may not work for everyone.
You have to remember, their model is a two way street. The Iowa National Guard is also involved, and they have an MOU in place. (If I recall correctly...)
So, how do you force such a model down... especially if the state isn't interested?
Quote from: TankerT on November 16, 2006, 09:22:23 PM
Implementing the Iowa model everywhere may not work for everyone.
You have to remember, their model is a two way street. The Iowa National Guard is also involved, and they have an MOU in place. (If I recall correctly...)
So, how do you force such a model down... especially if the state isn't interested?
From 1AF who has OPCON of lots of ANG Fighter Wings, along with HLS, Disaster, & AFRCC. Plus get the NGB to sign off on it. As I understand, it took Iowa two years to get where they are now. The biggest problem I see is some states are too small to make it work w/ a direct relationship & some are so big they already have our resources in SDFs or their own guard or state agency resources. We might be cheaper, but that comes with an org they don't control the training or ops for. I do think there is a lot of room to work though, and would be happy to refer some ANG officers I know to get involved.
Have any of you guys received the latest email from our National CC? 25 steps to success? Looks like the CC has adopted the Iowa model down to the last dot and tee. If anyone is interested, I can send it as an attachment to a PM: don't know how to send it to this blog.
Three guys responded to my offer to email it to them: somebody sent me a bad email address. My server won't send it because it says that the SMTP server will not forward to an unknown user. Resend your email addresses, guys.
Hit reply nad then in the blue box hit additional options and there is an option to attach a document....
Guess that I can't send my attachment, since the computer says that it is an HTM: whatever the Hell that is.
Will continue to forward to individual email addresses, as I receive them.
suspect that all of you will get a copy from your Wing King as they have time and the inclination to forward them.
you could just post or cut/paste it here & call it good.
Thanks for all of your comments, kuddos and positive criticizms. All are valuable. There are three documents you should read 1) The Report to the National Commander, 2) 25 Things about the Iowa Wing and 3) 25 Steps to a Successful Wing. It's a lot of reading and if you can stay awake they will take you up to speed on that we have done. e-mail me at ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov and I'll send them to you.
Last night I made a poor presentation to the NB about the IAWG program. I obviously did a poor job because all they focused upon was the IAWG-NG relationship. When you think and study about what we have done please try to avoid focusing solely on the relationship. It's very ephemeral. Focus instead on our change of personal and operating philosophy, MOU's and funding will not make you a successful Wing. Re-focusing your image will.
First and foremost you are what you think you are. You must change your image to yourself and to those around you. If you think you are a "senior member" you will be one. Whereas if you believe you are an "officer" you will behave like one. If you think you are a "volunteer" you will be one. But if you think you are a professional that's what you will be.
Personally I HATE the term volunteer. In first responder circles it has an extremely negative connotation. It is not something you want to be. Everyone is a volunteer for something. If you are equating a "volunteer" with unpaid, then say so. Say, that I am a professional who donates his time and talent to CAP. If you are equating a "volunteer" with someone who can quit at any time, I personally don't want anything to do with them. How can I count on my team if they can quit or abandon me at any time. However if you are equating a "volunteer' with someone who joins an organization. Then I, all members of the Armed Forces, police forces and fire departments are volunteers. I volunteered for CAP only once...the day I joined. Can I quit? Yes I can...just like the police officer and fireman can quit. The only difference is that they are compensated in cash whereas I receive something far more valuable.
Please focus on how we are attempting to reform personal responsibility and accountability. There can be no leadership without education, training and opportunity for responsibility. Focus on how we differentiate between training and practicing. They are two entirely different concepts that are often overlooked.
These are the important innovations of the Iowa project. Are they really innovative? No. All we did was return to the way it was in 1941-50.
Please come visit us during one of our WTAs. There is an excitement, a spirit, a commaraderie that I only experienced once before...at NBB. It's not an Iowa thing. NEBOOM, from this blog, came and visited and even he experienced it. And you and your Wing can do it too. Remember you are what you think about most of the time.
NC
I really like what Lt Col Critelli has to say here.
My problem with everyone stating that everyone should adopt the Iowa model is that most people focus on the relationship with the NG and the MOU.
You can have all the signed documents you want, but without trained personnel that understand their jobs, are accountable for them, and act the part of a professional, they mean squat. (As some of which Lt Col Critelli talks about.)
I think the core part of the Iowa Wing model that everyone should adopt, is the attitude toward professionalism, proficiency and esprit de corps. From what I have gathered, that is what is making their new program successful.
Everyone talks about their relationship to the NG, and their WTAs. That's great. But, I don't think that will work for everyone due to a lot of factors. (Don't get me wrong... I think everyone should take a long, hard look at those, and see how they could fit in their wing. I think we could all take a piece of it and make it a way to improve our wing.)
My concern is that if this model gets pushed down (centralized training and the MOU) without the professional team, the attitude and the leadership to back it up, that we could create a disaster.
We need to infuse the attitude and skills of being a professional into our officer corps. And, I mention skills, as I know too many officers that think they have the skills, but they don't. They think they have a professional demeanor, but all they have is an attitude.
This is a change that needs to come both from the top down, but the bottom up as well. This change also takes time, and key people leading it.
I would like to argue while people may hate the term "volunteer," there is a reality to that is what a lot of our membership is. They can quit at any time.
But, that is why at the same time, we need to ensure that we train professionals, and treat them as such. Treating a "volunteer" in a professional manner will help you not only earn their respect, but make them feel respected, and part of the team. And, often, being a part of something is what they signed up for, and for that, they will often stay. (Along with other factors, to include providing them with the training they need to do their job.)
(edit) Just to clarify, I am not stating in my above statement that I feel we do not have the current leadership to make adjustments to our organization to ensure we act and think like professionals, nor that any specific wing lacks that. I am just focusing on the overall idea that we need to approach this at multiple levels
Thanks TankerT
Where does everyone get this "quit at anytime" thing? That has absolutely nothing to do with volunteerism. We're no different from the policeman or fireman. Everyone can quit at any time....even POTUS.
I've been in a lot of service organizations but I have never seen this type of attitude except for CAP.
I hate to say this but frankly it is an excuse. When a project doesn't get started or done..."well, they're "just volunteers". When deadlines are not met..."well, they're "just volunteers". etc. etc. It's an EXCUSE FOR POOR LEADERSHIP.
Those who willingly give of their time, talent and treasure are the most motivated, creative and dedicated people you will ever find. Their compensation is far more valuable than cash. These (including CAP) are what is referred to as "high called people" meaning their dedication is due to a high sense of duty to their communities. They are very easy to motivate and lead.
For your contribution of time, talent and treasure you have a right to demand leaders who can bring out the best in us and have a vision as to how to use it. Get active in your Wings. Be a POSITIVE force and really make CAP's core values your personal operating standard. When someone around you turns negtive, bellyaches, etc. don't join in...and ask them to stop. That type of thing is killing our espirit de corps.
NC
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on November 17, 2006, 02:29:16 PM
Where does everyone get this "quit at anytime" thing?
I think this is something every person in a leadership position should take a long hard look at.
Does it have to do with a lack of leadership? A lack of training? A poor focus on our recruiting program?
Just a few of my 2c worth. Col Critelli has a whole series of good points about the Iowa experience. We, collectively, should stop chiping our teeth about MTAs, awards, MOUs, and all of the other things that we get diverted about. What he, and the Iowa team, have done is create a relationship in his state that works(apparently) for the Iowa Wing of CAP. We should watch this develop and then see if it works for other states.
I happen to live in a state where the Iowa model would have to be seriously changed. CA is about 800 miles from north to south and runs from the Sierra Nevada mts to the ocean. I doubt that the model would hold up with the size of the state and the number of members: we have just over 3,000 total.
What I don't understand is: why did Gen Pineda simply pick up the Iowa model and send it out to all wings, without any input from the Wings. The Region CCs must be in a real state of wonderment. Unfortunately, this sort of thing seems to be going on(or coming out of Maxwell) with alarming regularity lately.
More questions than answers, but pay attention to Critelli.
Quote from: TankerT on November 17, 2006, 01:38:25 PM
I really like what Lt Col Critelli has to say here.
My problem with everyone stating that everyone should adopt the Iowa model is that most people focus on the relationship with the NG and the MOU.
You can have all the signed documents you want, but without trained personnel that understand their jobs, are accountable for them, and act the part of a professional, they mean squat. (As some of which Lt Col Critelli talks about.)
I think the core part of the Iowa Wing model that everyone should adopt, is the attitude toward professionalism, proficiency and esprit de corps. From what I have gathered, that is what is making their new program successful.
<snip>
You've hit the nail right on the head here. The biggest thing that impressed me on our visit over there was the spirit of enthusiasm and professionalism that just permeated the place. All were in uniform, and most/all uniforms looked good. Their spirits were high. They clearly wanted to be there.
Although it's rather intangible, this spirit is an important component to the whole reorganization, IMHO. Simply put, it's an enabler. Why have the Iowa Wing people accomplished so much? Because they decided that they would
be professionals. Not just claim the title and then do nothing more about it, mind you, but actually
be professional. With this attitude, they found they could indeed accomplish their goals. And as they will attest, there were many obstacles and roadblocks to overcome.
Quote from: bosshawk on November 17, 2006, 07:15:23 PM
<snip>
I happen to live in a state where the Iowa model would have to be seriously changed. CA is about 800 miles from north to south and runs from the Sierra Nevada mts to the ocean. I doubt that the model would hold up with the size of the state and the number of members: we have just over 3,000 total.
<snip>
In the "25 Questions about the Iowa Wing's Re-organization" document, question 23 asks, "
Can't we just chose part of the plan?" Lt Col Critelli answers, "Unfortunately no. It's a consolidated matrix. The OTS works with the WTA and the Field Grade Officer Transition. The WTA works with ICAPA and the OTS. The Field Grade Officer transition works with the OTS and facilitates the WTA. Pull one thread and something unintended will unravel."
This is just about the only thing I might disagree with the good Colonel on (though my disagreement may only be a matter of semantics). Obviously the system would have to be modified to fit whatever wing it's being applied to. Not to diminish the importance of all the hard work and dedication they put in, but there were a number of factors in the Iowa reorganization that were a matter of good fortune (apparently all the planets aligned directly above Des Moines right when they needed to :)). How this is implemented in other wings, and the ultimate form the reorganization takes in each of these wings, will depend on some of the same things happening.
For instance, Iowa was fortunate they had a core group of leaders who were willing and able to devote the time and effort needed to lay the groundwork for their relationship with the state. Early on, they adopted the policy that every time the State EOC was activated, there would be someone in CAP's chair there. Fortunately, they happened to have people who were ready, able, and available to pull this duty. The "face time" they got from this was essential in building credibility with the State Emergency Management system, which in turn led to more missions and funding. Where would they be if they didn't have those individuals at that time?
There are several things that can go wrong when trying to implement this system elsewhere. Say you run into one or two individuals in key leadership positions in the State Government or National Guard who have had bad experiences with CAP and are unwilling to get past it. Or if you have leaders in the State Govt or NG who cannot or will not see the potential CAP brings (protecting their turf, resistant to change, etc). The whole thing could well go down the toilet. You have the misfortune of giving a bad briefing at the wrong time, you jeopardize the whole thing as well.
My opinion is that these and other factors will alter the final form that such a reorganization will take, and (IMHO) rightly so. Things have to be tailored to take into account the "atmosphere" in each state, as well as CAP's current situation in each wing.
Of course, none of this means we shouldn't try it!
Can some things be changed? Of course. Remember our Wing is the size of some Groups and squadrons. Is everything connected? We believe it is, a matrix if you will. But at the end of the day it has to fit into your wing's culture.
As far as Gen Pineda, he had me send it out as a starting point. You have to start somewhere. This cannot be and is not being shoved down anyone's throat. It is, however being shown as a way to start.
It's all about our perception of ourselves. As David MacKenzie Ogilvy, the father of advertising once said, "perception is reality."
NC
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on November 17, 2006, 11:05:14 PM
Can some things be changed? Of course. Remember our Wing is the size of some Groups and squadrons. Is everything connected? We believe it is, a matrix if you will. But at the end of the day it has to fit into your wing's culture.
As far as Gen Pineda, he had me send it out as a starting point. You have to start somewhere. This cannot be and is not being shoved down anyone's throat. It is, however being shown as a way to start.
It's all about our perception of ourselves. As David MacKenzie Ogilvy, the father of advertising once said, "perception is reality."
NC
OK, we're on the same page then. :)
DK
Has Iowa Wing reached a full year under this new model yet?
That would seem to be the 'first phase'.
Once they've had a chance to review their accomplishments (see what worked, what didn't, what needs adapting), then would seem a reasonable time for a study team to distill and distinguish:
1) what IA did that could be used everywhere
2) what IA did that depends on Guard support and involvement
3) what IA did that might be considered useful but optional
4) what IA did that may need adaptation to work elsewhere
That is exactly right. Iowa is trying some great new ideas but we should be careful about promoting them nationwide until we've seen if they work or not.
Quote from: ZigZag911 on November 18, 2006, 05:03:24 AM
Has Iowa Wing reached a full year under this new model yet?
That would seem to be the 'first phase'.
Once they've had a chance to review their accomplishments (see what worked, what didn't, what needs adapting), then would seem a reasonable time for a study team to distill and distinguish:
1) what IA did that could be used everywhere
2) what IA did that depends on Guard support and involvement
3) what IA did that might be considered useful but optional
4) what IA did that may need adaptation to work elsewhere
They've just completed 3 years under their reorganization.
I think we've all been scammed by Iowa. I read their papers. There's nothing new in here. They've just went behind the letter of the regulations and got into the spirit of the regs. For example, their WTA. A voluntary monthy meeting where their whole wing gets together. What's so wierd or controversial about that? Look at the other side of the issue, what is really wierd is a wing that meets only once a year...at a Wing Conference. That's wierd. Apparently my wing reads the regs to thing that the Wing Conference is the only time the wing is authorized to meet. We'll change that. >:D
They claim they invented "wing-centric" theory. Wrong...that's what the regs say. The CC is the only corporate officer for CAP and the Wing is his unit. Of course the Wing is the main operational unit in CAP that's how it is organized. Squadrons as tactical tools? Duh..what else would they be. That's what the structure in the regulations call for. The Wing establishes the squadrons. Can't get anymore structured than that. Field grade officers at wing, company grade at squadrons? Hardly innovative here. What is strange would be to have it the other way around.
Iowa has put one over on all of us. They read the regs understood the big picture and followed them. Notice that nowhere in all of these documents did they call for a reg change?
Way to go Iowa. :clap:
Quote from: NEBoom on November 18, 2006, 10:47:33 PM
Quote from: ZigZag911 on November 18, 2006, 05:03:24 AM
Has Iowa Wing reached a full year under this new model yet?
That would seem to be the 'first phase'.
Once they've had a chance to review their accomplishments (see what worked, what didn't, what needs adapting), then would seem a reasonable time for a study team to distill and distinguish:
1) what IA did that could be used everywhere
2) what IA did that depends on Guard support and involvement
3) what IA did that might be considered useful but optional
4) what IA did that may need adaptation to work elsewhere
They've just completed 3 years under their reorganization.
Then it's time for an outside, objective study and analysis about its applicability elsewhere.
Quote from: ZigZag911 on November 21, 2006, 06:13:26 AM
Then it's time for an outside, objective study and analysis about its applicability elsewhere.
As I understand it, every wing in the region was required to visit & do a due dillagence study about what was going on in Iowa & what could or could not be taken back to theri wings. Then the national commander came recently & now they're briefing at the national level as well as to all the AGs in the country & the CC of the National Guard Bureau. Recall now that NGB was briefed in on CAP a couple years back & Air Staff studied then shot down the idea of moving CAP over there. I'd look for more development with the guard on a national level, and I'd look for CAP to adopt some aspects of what's going on there.
I read everyones posts, and the letters associated with Iowa. I just could not imagine the same thing happening in a Wing that has say 2500 members. Logistically it would be a nightmare. If we were all as small as Iowa it would possibly be more feasible.
Quote from: mikeylikey on November 22, 2006, 09:49:17 PM
I read everyones posts, and the letters associated with Iowa. I just could not imagine the same thing happening in a Wing that has say 2500 members. Logistically it would be a nightmare. If we were all as small as Iowa it would possibly be more feasible.
Sure it could. You'd just have to push the structure down to the group-level. Same concept.
Quote from: shorning on November 22, 2006, 10:08:11 PM
Sure it could. You'd just have to push the structure down to the group-level. Same concept.
yep. Maybe even reshape/size groups aourd distribution & facilities. We could do it in Texas with some adjustment. I think it'd work even better that way in fact.
If somebody wants a a perspective from some members in a squad in iowa, just email me.
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 07, 2006, 06:34:57 PM
If somebody wants a a perspective from some members in a squad in iowa, just email me.
Go ahead and post it, a lot of us like what we are hearing about Iowa and are trying to move our little pieces in that direction. If there are pitfalls/problems we aren't seeing or hearing about, by all means lay them out for us to analyze.
I was at the WTA this past weekend, and I must say that I now have a higher opinion of whats going on, than before in my previous posts. In the breifing, it was noted that while we are pushing for higher ES readins, that does not mean anybody else will be moved due to AE or CP, as was thought to be correct. Another item learned was that the move of field grade officers to wing was to help avoid entrenchment in those jobs, so newer members like me and many new officers can get both a job and a taste of leadership. This really makes sense now that it was explained in more detail, along with the rational that goes with it. With the previous breifings, it seemed like they were doing it just because they could. I know know that that ideology is wrong- and never used; and that my characterization of Wing as using that was irresponsible and damaging to Iowa Wing. While I felt strongly about what I said, I was mistaken about most of what I said. I apologize to those offended or hurt by what was done. I will do what I can to help out.
Sincerely,
R.L.
Nicely put R.L.
Thanks
Quote from: RogueLeader on December 19, 2006, 08:17:20 PM
I was at the WTA this past weekend, and I must say that I now have a higher opinion of whats going on, than before in my previous posts. In the breifing, it was noted that while we are pushing for higher ES readins, that does not mean anybody else will be moved due to AE or CP, as was thought to be correct. Another item learned was that the move of field grade officers to wing was to help avoid entrenchment in those jobs, so newer members like me and many new officers can get both a job and a taste of leadership. This really makes sense now that it was explained in more detail, along with the rational that goes with it. With the previous breifings, it seemed like they were doing it just because they could. I know know that that ideology is wrong- and never used; and that my characterization of Wing as using that was irresponsible and damaging to Iowa Wing. While I felt strongly about what I said, I was mistaken about most of what I said. I apologize to those offended or hurt by what was done. I will do what I can to help out.
Sincerely,
R.L.
RL, thank you for flying out to the WTA and finding out what is really going on first hand. If you come and ask questions, you will find that everyone is willing to answer them and help you understand the many good things going on in the Wing. Congratulations on passing your CPR / First Aid training!
The December WTA was the biggest WTA so far. We had 150 officers and cadets (including RL) in attendance. This month we were supposed to have some UH-60 training flights take place but Mother Nature had some other ideas. So we improvised, adapted, and overcame and conducted ES practice for those that didn't have other things to tend to. We conducted 2 CPR / FA classes, 2 ACUT classes, conducted new pilot orientation for 12 new potential CAP Pilots, conducted FRO re-currency training, introduced the Wing Banker Program to our SQ/CC's and SQ/FM's, and thanks to the Wing Staff (who doubled as Cooks Saturday Night) we had one heck of a holiday dinner party. The Airmen Leadership school debuted and we had 30 cadets participating in that and another 10 as staff and the cadet orderly room staff.
We were visited by a delegation of Illinois Wing Officers and were able to show them what we have been doing. Hopefully they will return again to work with us and have a good time doing it.
It was a busy weekend for Iowa, and we are pressing onward.
Outstanding! Keep up the good work. Trevor is who I should ask about how ALS went no?
Quote from: cyclone on December 19, 2006, 09:52:17 PM
It was a busy weekend for Iowa, and we are pressing onward.
Busy is right! I am still catching my breath.
DNall, the first weekend of our ALS went VERY well. We have seven C/Basics in attendance, with the rest of the Wing Cadet Corps that was not in Comms or 1st Aid training also attending to assist and participate. The ICAPA Cadet Staff were strongly tested and responded VERY well working with the ICAPA Officer Staff and our Command Chief to provide a mini-encampment enviroment that served as the framework for the ALS.
We are already busy getting ready for the final WTA of the ALS and future ICAPA special activities.
Good deal. I stell need to get you down here. We're runnign Gp level ALS's in the 80-90 range twice a year. CTEP dates for Spring are in flux based on availability at Lackland, but may be as early as late Febuary & late as April. Let me do some checking & I'll get back to you. Maybe if you're going to drive it you cn load up a van w/ cadets sign them up for the varrious sessions. Man, if I can send you backa couple CCSC grads & one each on the other courses, yall should be set for the next ten years or so, maybe an extra (adult) junior officer to sit through STEP (which includes TLC). Hell, bring chief with ya if you can, got a couple retired SNCOs around here that'll make sure he doesn't buy his own. Seriously though, I'm going to need to coordinate with you & Nick when this goes down, cause I'm going to need some people breifed.
I am all for the trip down. I am starting to think that getting a few of the ICAPA Cadet staff to come down to go through the OTS and CCSC would be a great experience for them and go a long way to helping them plan our own for ICAPA.
I am anxious to hear the dates and hope that they don't conflict with our WTA's like the Fall school did. Fingers are crossed!
Oh and yes, I am planning on asking the Command Chief to come along if he is available.
The monthly training activity could provide a framework for putting a lot of 20+ year members who aren't as active (or healthy or energetic) as before who still have a lot to teach back in active service to CAP.
Another thing that was said at the breifing is that in our next ES Academey, is that there will be more than CAP personel there. Police- both ground and air units will be there, as well as some Sherriff Patrol members, along with various other ES groups.
This post is a reply to Major Carrales in another topic. I wanted to put it here to keep all Iowa replies in one place.
Major Carrales,
Yes we are working hard to develop ICAPA somewhat along the lines of the Texas CTEP program. The ICAPA staff are hard at work making Cadet Program stew from some great sources, both inside of Iowa (namely some GREAT work from the Davenport Composite Squadron and from the first version of ICAPA that ran a few years ago on a small scale) and externally from Texas and from our neighbors in Nebraska.
Our monthly WTA gives us a great framework to work with. The logistics, facilities, and personnel we need are all in one place. The Squadron Cadet Corps comes together and melds into the Iowa Wing Cadet Corps once a month in an encampment environment. It really is exciting!
So Henderson you think the last WTA was really exciting do you? Fine for you to say. You were in the ranks during formation. I had to march out there in front of 150 (70% of the entire active component of the Wing) with those darn cadets watching every step and corner I wrongly made. And then there's that CMSGT with those eyes of steel and voice from the pit of hell calling the entire Wing to attention with a thunder clap of 150 set of heels that was reminiscent of something out of an old war movie, except I was on the wrong side of the screen. Exciting No. It was downright scary.
Like they say, be carefult what you ask for you just might get it. We did. Now we have to live up to it. I'm taking drill lessons from the steely-eyed-one (he who must be obeyed) so I can get off the cadet's black list.
Friends of the blog. The Iowa program is not for everyone. It works in Iowa and may not work in your Wing. It's not the program I want you to adopt or even focus on, it's the process we used to get to a program.
The key is that all Wings should encourage to engage in a process of discernment to determine if and how they are complying with Title 10 and Title 36. If your Wing has little or no involvement with your state EMD you are not complying with your statutory mandate. If it is disorganized to the extent that it is not ready or prepared for a timely and proper statewide response to a mission you are not complying with your statutory mandate. If it does not know on a first name basis the state agency players in emergency services and disaster relief, you are not complying with the statutory mandate. Look at Title 36 USC 40302. (I've posted it elsewhere on this board) If your wing does not have a strategic plan to accomplish all the tasks set forth in section (1)(B)(1) and (2) , you are not complying with the statutory mandate.
The compliance strategy we used ( Wing-Centric operational theory, OTS, ICAPA, All Iowa Squadron, Field Officer Transition, and all the others) may be different for your Wing. What is important is that you have one.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Years to you and your families. It's been a pleasure to serve with each of you across the country.
Nick Critelli
Oh I'm sure we'd do things a little different. I know you guys approached this from one direction & ended up doing all this higher standards better organization/structure as a necessary evil to attain those goals. I on the other hand would like to see everyone doing that stuff just fo the sake of itself & regardless of what relationship or support with the state. I like the partnership arrangement w/ readiness goals & compliance standards. That's the real deal. I do think this is something that can be run nationally, with some modifications & outside support & in conjunciton with some additional ideas, & with that larger scale relationship managed by say 1AF & thru them to the TAGs. I don't think there's anything worng with having a vision to change teh world, not when you already did the impossible in one state.
Col Critelli
Are you an English bannister as well as an American lawyer?
Quote from: flapsUP on December 21, 2006, 09:58:49 PM
Col Critelli
Are you an English bannister as well as an American lawyer?
Hopefully he's no type of bannister: (http://www.homesweetlandhome.ca/pictures/Bannister.jpg)
A barrister or solicitor, perhaps. ;)
Man that really made me laugh, especially since I know Lt Col Critelli! ;D
Very nicely done Pylon!
That banister would make a really sweet Yule Post. Where did I put that chainsaw? ;D
Quote from: Pylon on December 21, 2006, 10:04:46 PM
Hopefully he's no type of bannister:
A barrister or solicitor, perhaps. ;)
Nice catch. Nice grain too. Why would he be a barrister by the way? Did I miss something on that one?
Am I ever embarrassed. I hope the Col has a sense of humor. Sorry sir.
;D
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on December 20, 2006, 06:50:36 PM
So Henderson you think the last WTA was really exciting do you? Fine for you to say. You were in the ranks during formation. I had to march out there in front of 150 (70% of the entire active component of the Wing) with those darn cadets watching every step and corner I wrongly made. And then there's that CMSGT with those eyes of steel and voice from the pit of hell calling the entire Wing to attention with a thunder clap of 150 set of heels that was reminiscent of something out of an old war movie, except I was on the wrong side of the screen. Exciting No. It was downright scary.
Like they say, be carefult what you ask for you just might get it. We did. Now we have to live up to it. I'm taking drill lessons from the steely-eyed-one (he who must be obeyed) so I can get off the cadet's black list.
Friends of the blog. The Iowa program is not for everyone. It works in Iowa and may not work in your Wing. It's not the program I want you to adopt or even focus on, it's the process we used to get to a program.
The key is that all Wings should encourage to engage in a process of discernment to determine if and how they are complying with Title 10 and Title 36. If your Wing has little or no involvement with your state EMD you are not complying with your statutory mandate. If it is disorganized to the extent that it is not ready or prepared for a timely and proper statewide response to a mission you are not complying with your statutory mandate. If it does not know on a first name basis the state agency players in emergency services and disaster relief, you are not complying with the statutory mandate. Look at Title 36 USC 40302. (I've posted it elsewhere on this board) If your wing does not have a strategic plan to accomplish all the tasks set forth in section (1)(B)(1) and (2) , you are not complying with the statutory mandate.
The compliance strategy we used ( Wing-Centric operational theory, OTS, ICAPA, All Iowa Squadron, Field Officer Transition, and all the others) may be different for your Wing. What is important is that you have one.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Years to you and your families. It's been a pleasure to serve with each of you across the country.
Nick Critelli
It may not be the model that you want everybody else to look at, but it seems like it is what the CAP/CC wants everybody too. Or did I misunderstand that?
Banister...that's funny. I've been called much worse. I understand NOTF called me outrageous or something to that effect the other day. Flapsup, yes to both your questions: it is me and I do have a sense of humor (or I would never be able to survive in CAP). For a good laugh, go to www.critellilaw.com. I'm the guy on the right, my son is on the left. And yes, we still wear the wigs. There is a life outside of CAP.
Merry Christmas everyone
NC
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on December 23, 2006, 01:47:30 AM
Banister...that's funny. I've been called much worse. I understand NOTF called me outrageous or something to that effect the other day. Flapsup, yes to both your questions: it is me and I do have a sense of humor (or I would never be able to survive in CAP). For a good laugh, go to www.critellilaw.com. I'm the guy on the right, my son is on the left. And yes, we still wear the wigs. There is a life outside of CAP.
Merry Christmas everyone
NC
Barrister, eh?
I'd like a double grande mocha esspresso, heavy on the nondairy soy, more heat less foam with a double shot of cinnamon and amaretto.
And can i get a new Starbuck's frequent drinker club card? I left my old one at home.
Johnny Y.
You're confusing barrista (the Starbucks servers) with barrister (the sharkslawyers).
Quote from: arajca on December 23, 2006, 04:38:11 AM
You're confusing barrista (the Starbucks servers) with barrister (the sharkslawyers).
Q: What do you call a cruise ship full of lawyers sinking off the coast of California?
A: A good start...
>:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
>:D
Our JA tells me that the " barrista" is one of the most respected lawyers in the US and in the UK and is unbelieveably devoted to CAP. He has done incredible things for CAP on the national level and in his state. This is probably not the time to bring out our commedy routine of lawyer jokes.
Quote from: Johnny Yuma on December 25, 2006, 08:24:39 PM
Q: What do you call a cruise ship full of lawyers sinking off the coast of California?
A: A good start...
>:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
>:D
Q: How can you tell if a lawyer is lying?
A: If his lips are moving.
;) Yup, that's right out of my LAW classes, actually...
OK...I give up. (Flapsup...don't believe a word of it.) Let's get the focus back on IAWG and not on any one member.
We are putting together a IAWG-WTA video that will show the various WTA activities, e.g. OTS, ICAPA, ES Academies, etc. Likewise we are working on a Webinar (see Structural Change thread) to talk your questions about IAWG reorganization. Hopefully we can come to decision within the next couple of weeks. The video will take about a month.
Nick Critelli
Okay, back to Iowa. I asked about this a while back on CAPPortal....I would be very interested in seeing some data on are the criteria the NG was asking you to meet in terms of readiness. Any reports on how this has been working out?
I'll second that! Fear of the unknown is one our biggest problems. It keeps a lot of Cadets and Officers from attending Sar-Ex's and other activities... The more information we can lay out for our members the more amenable to the change they are likely to be. I'm sure there are some officers out there wondering if they can "cut the mustard" when it comes to NG standards. Knowing what those standards are in plain language will be a big help.
hello all.
I am glad to report that I am on a well deserved vacation in sunny florida. In spite of my rabid desire to get away from all work, and commitments I am still drawn to CAP. If anyone in Florida wing has a burning desire to talk CAP, Title 10/36, Emergency response in general, or the Iowa Plan I would happily get together for a chat.
Hawkeye
Hawkeye,
Sunny Florida?!?! I wish I were there as well.
Knowing Lt. Col Critelli, his nickname is forever changed.....Barrista...Starbucks...LOL
Getting back to the Cadet Program part of Iowa, along side Lt Henderson, and the rest of the faithfull crew of the CP here in Iowa, I can and will try to answer any and all of your questions that you may have.
Let me know!!
Cadet Program Guy, IA WG DCP
I think I'm squared up on cadet programs, talking to Trevor & all. Look forward to getting some folks down to CTEP for some good ole fashion idea theft in both directions. Think it'll be a great professional development opportunity for all of us.
On the NG/State readiness standards... the way I understand this program, you guys wanted missions & needed help; went to state, they brought you into this quasi-SDF role & treat you like they manage the guard. That means readiness standards tied to funding.
So... what's the standards, are they formal/informal targets, are they hard tied to money or no, is there bonus money at target points, most of all how are the metrics run & reported, what factors are considered, what additional management & data collection do you do to accomplish this (cause the CAP-side is almost non-existant)... you know the details. You guys may have been aiming for this point, but a lot of wings are going to take the slow change round about way to get to a similar place (for a lot of reasons). I think it's key to show the chain of motivations that leads to place you are now.
On a sub-detail, we glossed quickly & I'd like more detail... CP/AE focused members are NOT counted against readiness totals? Sticking with the guard comparison, you could call them exclusively title 10 members. The guard has trouble meassuring these kinds of things themselves - not cause they're bad at it, but 50 dif standards plus people constantly in flux. I'm looking for more than the simple yes or no on this one. How do you deal with in-between varriable percentage stuff. For instance, I used to do tons of ES but have at this point stepped back & do almost exclusively cadet programs. I'm putting my GTL back active to make my CC happy so he doesn't have to take so many calls, but not cause I want to. What sort of objective formula are you using or looking to develop to accuratley reflect reality in the readiness standards?
QuoteSo... what's the standards, are they formal/informal targets, are they hard tied to money or no, is there bonus money at target points, most of all how are the metrics run & reported, what factors are considered, what additional management & data collection do you do to accomplish this (cause the CAP-side is almost non-existant)... you know the details.
I think we're interested in exactly whats tracking and I'm sure DNall would agree that we're not asking for what your performance looks like as that could be an OPSEC issue.
Well this thread has sat dormant for a while so I guess I'll tackle it. In several talks with EMA, and National Guard personnel our "readiness and preparedness" was talked about. The wing's leadership was quick to ask what the National Guard's standards were. They base readiness on 70%. 70% of what we thought?
Well we are looking at two different things.
#1 Readiness. This is the base level of knowledge and training that a member has. An airman, or soldier is not counted as an asset in the unit's readiness statistic until they complete Basic Training, AIT, or other job related skills. CAP has similar base knowledge and skills that must be completed before our members can be operational. Level 1, Cadet Protection, General ES, and then an Emergency Services Specialty (GTM, Scanner, MSA, MRO, ETC), are a starting point. Fortunately our academy graduates have completed all of the requirements to meet readiness guidelines.
#2. Preparedness. This topic is a little more subjective. What does it meet to be "prepared"? Well, this is the standard that says you can actually do the jobs that have been tasked to you. This means practice. Squadrons should practice their skills.
So what has Iowa done? First of all we decided that each functional unit should achieve a 70% readiness, and preparedness goal. This number allows for those people who only want to do aerospace, or cadet programs, but is a high enough standard that we can assure that when requests come down from the feds, or the state (Title 10/Title 36) we know that we will be able to respond.
T next question will be the matrix of requirements that qualifies an individual as both ready, and prepare. A committee has been formed with the DO, and Several Squadron CC's to create a matrix. Perhaps Critelli, or Cyclone can comment on the status of this matrix.
Ill be in Juno Beach until Wednesday if anyone is interested
I am the "steely-eyed" Chief the Iowa Wing is so fond of. One of the most important things we are doing is bring back the non-commissioned officer corps. We intend to use the NCO as our armed forces do: to lead, train, demand accountability and compliance. I have recently been appointed by General Pineda as CAP's first command chief, and have been tasked to assist any wing seeking to use the vast expireance of the NCO to better our organization.
Quote from: isuhawkeye on December 31, 2006, 06:57:41 PM
Well this thread has sat dormant for a while so I guess I'll tackle it. In several talks with EMA, and National Guard personnel our "readiness and preparedness" was talked about. The wing's leadership was quick to ask what the National Guard's standards were. They base readiness on 70%. 70% of what we thought?
Well we are looking at two different things.
#1 Readiness. This is the base level of knowledge and training that a member has. An airman, or soldier is not counted as an asset in the unit's readiness statistic until they complete Basic Training, AIT, or other job related skills. CAP has similar base knowledge and skills that must be completed before our members can be operational. Level 1, Cadet Protection, General ES, and then an Emergency Services Specialty (GTM, Scanner, MSA, MRO, ETC), are a starting point. Fortunately our academy graduates have completed all of the requirements to meet readiness guidelines.
#2. Preparedness. This topic is a little more subjective. What does it meet to be "prepared"? Well, this is the standard that says you can actually do the jobs that have been tasked to you. This means practice. Squadrons should practice their skills.
So what has Iowa done? First of all we decided that each functional unit should achieve a 70% readiness, and preparedness goal. This number allows for those people who only want to do aerospace, or cadet programs, but is a high enough standard that we can assure that when requests come down from the feds, or the state (Title 10/Title 36) we know that we will be able to respond.
T next question will be the matrix of requirements that qualifies an individual as both ready, and prepare. A committee has been formed with the DO, and Several Squadron CC's to create a matrix. Perhaps Critelli, or Cyclone can comment on the status of this matrix.
Drink an umbrella drink for me isuhawkeye!
The readiness and preparedness standards have been a work in progress. We have worked extensively with the unit commanders to take hard looks at their membership rosters and purge out people who are truly inactive so that they can get an accurate assessment of who is truly there to start looking at.
Once we purged those people it was on to identifying the qualified vs unqualified. If they were unqualified it became an exercise to determine what they needed to get qualified and then tracking out what to do in order to hit the mark.
As we've worked that out we have been trying to fine tune standards of practice. Practice is not as easy to measure as qualification, but we are working that out. We are encouraging proficiency by creating unit practices as well as practice opportunities regularly for our qualified people.
Looks to me like you're trying to jig the numbers. You purge the inactive members to make the rest of the squadron numbers look good. It's all subjective. Who is inactive? What must one do to be considered active?
The last I read, you still are operating under the "yall come and we'll convert you" theory of recruitment. You take all comers and try to convert them into what the squadron needs. Fire departments tried this and it almost broke them. If you truly want to adopt a readiness and preparedness standard you have to be willing to give up "yall come" membership and go to slot recruitment.
OAM: I understand your CS is hosting an internet teleconference (Structural Change thread). See if you can get him to host one for this thread so we all can hear what you have to say about your Wing's progress.
Keep up the good work Iowa. You may be our only hope for turning this organization around.
I have no problem setting up a Webinar on the Iowa Wing to rountable matters discussed in this thread provided there is enough interest. Frankly it isn't work the effort and cost (which I'll absorb) if only ten or so people are interested.
What say out there....any interest?
NICK CRITELLI, Lt Col CAP
Chief of Staff --- Iowa Wing
Count me in, and I can probably get our WG/CC or WG/CV interested along with a few others.
Thanks Al.
I didn't think there would be much interest in attending a Webinar about what the IAWG reorganization is all about. However if you wish to personally discuss our situation, e-mail me and I'll give you my cell phone and we can talk.
NICK CRITELLI
ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov
Quote from: flapsUP on January 02, 2007, 11:15:58 PM
Looks to me like you're trying to jig the numbers. You purge the inactive members to make the rest of the squadron numbers look good. It's all subjective. Who is inactive? What must one do to be considered active?
The last I read, you still are operating under the "yall come and we'll convert you" theory of recruitment. You take all comers and try to convert them into what the squadron needs. Fire departments tried this and it almost broke them. If you truly want to adopt a readiness and preparedness standard you have to be willing to give up "yall come" membership and go to slot recruitment.
OAM: I understand your CS is hosting an internet teleconference (Structural Change thread). See if you can get him to host one for this thread so we all can hear what you have to say about your Wing's progress.
Keep up the good work Iowa. You may be our only hope for turning this organization around.
Nope, no "jigging" in numbers. We are transferring out inactives to our reserve squadron (where they should have been to begin with). For example, we all have had people in our units that pay dues and show up once, twice, three times per year. Either that or their current status in life (work, kids, etc) don't allow them to participate in CAP regularly (on a monthly basis). So they are transferred to the 000 Reserve Squadron. That way the unit commander isn't staring at an Alpha roster with someone on there who really cannot currently fulfil the needs of the unit. From the perspective of the Wing HQ it allows us to better look at our people and see who are current and qualified people are that we can count on to respond and work our recruitment and training to make up for deficiencies. If someone has time to be active again, enter the CAPF 2a, and back to a local unit you go.
The days of "yall come" recruitment are over in Iowa. We are selectively recruiting to fill the target need. All of our new officers are going through the OTS to improve our quality and standardize our training. We are looking for people with mission skills and motivation. The guy with a checkbook in his hot little hands joining right now is not what's going on. We have a method to the recruitment now that helps ensure greater success and retention with our new officers and cadets so that we are not fighting many of the mistakes of the past.
We have also started to work with unit leadership to generate Unit Manning Documents. Basically what would your ideal unit staffing be to function with your objectives. 6 mission pilots, 4 observers, 3 GTL's, 8 GTM's, 1 safety officer, 1 cadet leadership officer etc. That way as we recruit we know who we need to be looking for. This allows us to fill deficiencies faster and will help keep away problems of over recruitment (20 pilots, one airplane, 6 missions per year for the unit - do the math).
Give us a call flapsUP or better yet, venture over to Iowa for one of our WTA's. You will like what you see.
Thanks. You guys really are on the cutting edge. A lean, mean, well trained mission ready CAP. Anyone want to make book as to how long Iowa will operate before NHQ or the USAF shuts it down. Too creative, too much success, too much spotlight. You're in an organization where mediocraty rules.
We need to wake up. We worry more about our clothing than our mission. CAP is about to die and we're going to let it happen if we don't do something about it. Look at the numbers. 50,000 members out of 300,000,000 population. There are TEN TIMES more jrotc members than CAP senior and cadet's combined.
Someone needs to Search and Rescue CAP and I hope Iowa gets the mission.
FlapsUP, thanks for the kind words about Iowa. Iowa is doing all of this within CAP regs. We don't have any magical supplements or anything, we are carrying everything out within the scope of it all.
We fought many of the same battles in Iowa that we discuss today on CAPTALK three years ago when this journey began. The naysayers screamed, and clawed, and punched, and kicked, but in the end many of them realized it could be done and was the best thing for Iowa CAP.
I don't think that NHQ, the Air Force, or anyone is short sighted enough to shut down something that is successful. They all have legitimate questions that we've happily answered and they have been pleasantly surprised. We passed the litmus test of the Air Force Staff Assistance Visit during this time. We've still continued to do SUI's of our units and tried to do our due diligence to keep everything within the scope of our regs and legislation.
What we have done has been a long, planned, painful process of relationship building, professional development, and planned improvement. I doubt that any other Wing would ever go through this all quite like we did, and since Iowa has survived it we are more than happy to explain how to make it happen with as little turmoil as possible.
The biggest deterrant was pointless bickering. How and why so many in CAP will fight to the death over an item on a uniform but won't lift a finger to better improve our readiness is astonishing. Communication and relationships are what an improved CAP are all about. Hopefully CAP will improve as a whole and we can serve America better, but it is going to take a lot of frank discussions to get us there.
Yawn <stretching>
Iowa Wing's Emergency Services Academy is coming up at our February and March WTA's (last weekends in Feb / Mar).
We will be doing classroom and field training in the following specialties:
GTM
GTL
MRO
FLM
MS
MO
MP
If anyone would like to attend... ? We will put you up in our barracks and feed you. Just figure out how to get here (Des Moines, Iowa <not to be confused with Idaho>).
Also, we are always trying to improve our curriculum for this training. If you have any good stuff for students beyond the National Boiler Plate material please PM me as we are always looking for better stuff.
So from what I have read and seen on the Iowa webpage, you guys are selectively recruiting. Have you turned anyone away from joining because they don't fit a skill set you are in need of?
We really have not had to formally "turn away" anyone. During our recruitment we are honest about the time and financial commitment joining is. We also explain what we expect of an officer to do. The people that offer little and wouldn't really do anything anyway walk away.
Our recruitment has been such that we haven't had to worry about turning many away due to skill. This current OTS class is almost half pilots and they hail from areas where we need more pilots and aircrews to do the missions. The other half all possess various skills and desires to help bolster operations in their areas for when they will graduate.
Selective recruiting is the salvation of CAP. The any-moron-can-join recruiting policy has been the kiss of death for CAP. It has flooded the organization with high maintenance wannabe do nothings, who look like hell in a uniform, and are the root cause of our image problems with the Air Force and the greater public. Don't let them in and get them out the back door as quickly as possible!
Does anyone here know a lot about the Iowa Wing OTS program? I've been meaning to check that out but didn't know where to start until now.
I'm in favor of a national OTS program for all wings, to either replace Level I or incoporate it into the OTS curriculum.
Quote from: Chief Chiafos on January 15, 2007, 07:23:05 PM
Selective recruiting is the salvation of CAP. The any-moron-can-join recruiting policy has been the kiss of death for CAP. It has flooded the organization with high maintenance wannabe do nothings, who look like hell in a uniform, and are the root cause of our image problems with the Air Force and the greater public. Don't let them in and get them out the back door as quickly as possible!
Well. It is a double edged sword. We would need a better policy overall to help support our selection/rejection process. And, it would be hard to ensure that it meets all state laws. (Face it... you get more "selective" you get lawsuits... and can we afford that press?)
And, selective recruiting is also subjective recruiting many times. Some of the biggest pains I have met are the people that you would think would make great CAP members. (Retired Senior Officer/NCO... graduate degree... etc...)
But... yeah... we do need to have better quality control.
Problem is... to implement a good selective recruiting program... you need quality people that are willing to say no involved... that are aware of the current legal situation for your area.
And, in my area... it's hard to say no unless they have a criminal record without being sued successfully.
Not to say I haven't successfully been able to talk some bad apples out of joining by selling them on the "true cost" or "massive amounts of work required" angles.
Quote from: Guardrail on January 15, 2007, 07:30:36 PM
Does anyone here know a lot about the Iowa Wing OTS program? I've been meaning to check that out but didn't know where to start until now.
I'm in favor of a national OTS program for all wings, to either replace Level I or incoporate it into the OTS curriculum.
They put out bullitens and post stuff on the web for the general concepts. And they've put stuff out on boards that you can read. You can get a good idea.
It sounds like a great program. I see problems implementing it nationwide for various factors as is.
I think my wing would have a hard time implementing it due to our geography and the facilities available.
Quote from: TankerT on January 15, 2007, 07:37:36 PMBut... yeah... we do need to have better quality control.
How about a specialty track in Quality Assurance? The Air Force has one, and I think it would be a great supplement to the IG system in CAP. CAP could model theirs after the Air Force model.
There have been questions as to what all the Iowa Wing OTS curriculum is. The following is an overly-simple outline of the OTS.
Prior to OTS:
Public Recruitment
Interest Meetings
One-on-one interview and selection
Join Iowa CAP
Get a dress and a utility uniform
Get uniform fitted and sewn
1st Month:
Level 1, CPPT
General ES Training
Basic Comm User Training
ICS 100 Training
CAP Driver Checkout
Uniform Alterations (catch mistakes and fix)
<Homework> FEMA EMI IS 100 & 700 Courses
2nd Month:
Advanced Comm User Training (All)
CPR / FA / AED Training (Non-Pilots)
New Pilot Orientation Training (Pilots)
<Homework> FEMA EMI IS 200 Course
3rd Month:
Squadron Leadership School
Teamwork and Communications Activities
<Homework> FEMA EMI IS 800 Course
4th Month:
Emergency Services Academy - Classroom Weekend
Classroom Training in either:
- Aircrew Basic (Mission Scanner)
- Mission Support (FLM / MRO)
- Ground Team Basic (GTM3 / UDF)
<Homework> CAPT 117
5th Month:
Emergency Services Academy - Field Operations Weekend
Field Training in either:
- Aircrew Basic (Mission Scanner)
- Mission Support (FLM / MRO)
- Ground Team Basic (GTM3 / UDF)
<Homework> AEPSM Test
6th Month:
- AFIADL 13 Review
- AFIADL 13 Testing
- Graduation Banquet
Hopefully this explains the process a little clearer.
I like it. Many people would be surprised to learn that you needed to complete about 200 hours of initial training upon joining CAP in WWII so I don't think this is too much to ask.
Its a lot, but you need to really take advantage of that initial surge of enthusiasm to hook folks in. This strcutured program would give them an definite feeling of accomplishment.
RiverAux, that's right. A person who has only taken the Level 1 course is far from a functioning and useful officer. So we've designed a program to give them a base line of good education for them to move on and become very useful and productive officers quickly.
The end result is shocking when they show up at their new unit after graduation. Their level of knowledge and enthusiasm combine to help give the squadron a new jolt of energy every 6 mos.
Good morning everyone!
Over on the other thread a major point of debate/concern was about the OTS being "mandatory," leading some to assume that Iowa Wing is, in effect, making additional requirements for promotion.
I've been studying the Iowa reorganization in my spare time since late October, and my interpretation is that OTS is "mandatory for new members" only as a matter of Wing policy, and that if members are not able to attend the course for whatever reason, they have some options. For example, they could complete things like Level I and so forth at their units (or on their own now that some of those things are on-line). They also could attend the parts of OTS they'd be available for, but not the whole thing. As long as they get the minimums done, they'd be promotable per CAP regs, and would in fact be promoted. They could then catch the remainder of the training on the next cycle.
Another question that's come up concerns transfer members, returning members, and/or anyone else who already has their rank prior to the reorganization. Again, these members have options. They can attend whatever part of OTS they wish (like to get ES qual, or perhaps take their SLS if they haven't already), but are not required to attend the whole thing.
The bottom line here is that OTS gives you all the required things for promotion per CAP regs, plus a lot more to prepare you to be a capable officer once you get to the home unit. There is no attempt to keep anyone down (to the contrary, OTS will greatly help a new member get started in CAP), no attempt to usurp National regulations, nothing like that.
As I like to tell people who've been asking me questions about it, "Common sense is not suspended."
If I'm off base with this analysis, I'm sure the Iowa gang will correct me, but that's the way I see it. Nothing evil or conspiratorial, just a wing trying to make it's Wing HQ do someting good to support it's members, which is what we all should be trying for.
Well, I've got to go get a couple of teeth drilled, everyone have a good day.
Quote from: cyclone on January 22, 2007, 03:36:15 AM
There have been questions as to what all the Iowa Wing OTS curriculum is. The following is an overly-simple outline of the OTS.
Prior to OTS:
Public Recruitment
Interest Meetings
One-on-one interview and selection
Join Iowa CAP
Get a dress and a utility uniform
Get uniform fitted and sewn
1st Month:
Level 1, CPPT
General ES Training
Basic Comm User Training
ICS 100 Training
CAP Driver Checkout
Uniform Alterations (catch mistakes and fix)
<Homework> FEMA EMI IS 100 & 700 Courses
2nd Month:
Advanced Comm User Training (All)
CPR / FA / AED Training (Non-Pilots)
New Pilot Orientation Training (Pilots)
<Homework> FEMA EMI IS 200 Course
3rd Month:
Squadron Leadership School
Teamwork and Communications Activities
<Homework> FEMA EMI IS 800 Course
4th Month:
Emergency Services Academy - Classroom Weekend
Classroom Training in either:
- Aircrew Basic (Mission Scanner)
- Mission Support (FLM / MRO)
- Ground Team Basic (GTM3 / UDF)
<Homework> CAPT 117
5th Month:
Emergency Services Academy - Field Operations Weekend
Field Training in either:
- Aircrew Basic (Mission Scanner)
- Mission Support (FLM / MRO)
- Ground Team Basic (GTM3 / UDF)
<Homework> AEPSM Test
6th Month:
- AFIADL 13 Review
- AFIADL 13 Testing
- Graduation Banquet
Hopefully this explains the process a little clearer.
It does. And it sounds pretty good. Personally, I'd love to see a CAP where you don't get your bars until you've done all of this.
Structured and definitely more military-like --
(and as someone medical'd out of ROTC and thus college I'm a fan of approaching what I should have been) [ if this makes me sound like a poser, I'm sorry, Id have been thrilled to go AD but the AF decided against that because I had asthma back in childhood...I'm still looking for a way to commission]
--
*Is there any kind of similar progression / structured program being put into place for those above the grade of 2nd Lt?
*Being associated with the Guard do you have any access to Army PME, leadership courses or similar type training?
* Have you noticed a shift in the number of Officers taking the AF PME over the corporate courses? - SOS/ACSC etc over RSC etc...
Iowa Wing is making no additional requirements for promotion. New officer applications are sent to IAWG HQ for review prior to going to NHQ. New officers are all put into one unit for processing and preparation for the next OTS Cycle. This relieves the units of the burden of dealing with the administration and training of new officers.
We try to make it very understood to incoming new officers that the WTA is the avenue of new training and that if they are unable to schedule the WTA for the upcoming cycle then we will get them on the next one. To graduate from the OTS and be eligible for the OTS awards (honor gradutate) the student must complete 5 of the 6 weekends.
Current officers who have not done any of this training are invited to attend whatever portions are needed.
The OTS has been designed as a vehicle to increase professionalism, uniformity, knowledge, retention, and morale. The quality and caliber of the OTS graduates is apparent.
If adjoining Wings had new officers they would like to send as a demo to see how it works we would be happy to work something out.
I have a question about the training cycle.
Does it run continuously...or is it just run twice a year?
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 22, 2007, 04:47:59 PM
*Is there any kind of similar progression / structured program being put into place for those above the grade of 2nd Lt?
We are working on a follow up program with leadership training for officers that they can make use of after the OTS. The OTS graduates are in the pool of company grade officers that are able to be on staff duty as an Orderly Room officer to help run the WTA's.
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 22, 2007, 04:47:59 PM
*Being associated with the Guard do you have any access to Army PME, leadership courses or similar type training?
We have been able to do some joint training with the Army Guard and Air Guard. As far as PME we are just getting into getting some help with some of the advanced leadership training.
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 22, 2007, 04:47:59 PM
* Have you noticed a shift in the number of Officers taking the AF PME over the corporate courses? - SOS/ACSC etc over RSC etc...
A little, but not much yet. I think that we will see it as time goes on. Other figures are going up like our AFIADL 13 completion rate, etc. We are seeing a very large increase in FEMA EMI courses being completed and ICS course progression.
Quote from: lordmonar on January 22, 2007, 05:19:28 PM
I have a question about the training cycle.
Does it run continuously...or is it just run twice a year?
The cycle starts twice per year.
Thank you for the answers
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 22, 2007, 04:47:59 PM
* Have you noticed a shift in the number of Officers taking the AF PME over the corporate courses? - SOS/ACSC etc over RSC etc...
Those courses have been allowed for a good while, going back at least ten to fifteen years. We have accepted those courses in lieu of the CAP courses, and ECI permitted CAP officers to take them too.
I was aware of that, what I meant was: since aligning with the Guard if the corporate courses have been abandoned by and large for the Real PME.
Quote from: SAR-EMT1 on January 22, 2007, 06:22:15 PM
I was aware of that, what I meant was: since aligning with the Guard if the corporate courses have been abandoned by and large for the Real PME.
My apology, I didn't realize you were addressing the IAWG course.
Judging from the break-down offered by cyclone, there don't appear to be any military PME courses in there. But also, it is put forth as only the simplest of outlines. There may be, but they might not be mentioned.
Quite alright...
We have not incorporated any formal Army or Air Force PME into the system. However we have incorporated more D&C type activities into the system. The recruits stand inspection and are taught basic drill for formation and awards ceremony purposes.
I'd venture to guess though that if NHQ let them abandon the existing PD program that they'd create an OTS more in line with real AMS/OTS at least in academic content. And that they'd continue to take advantage of the AFIADL PMEs. I'd also venture to guess that they'd create an enlisted corps & better emulate the structure of the ANG/Res. That's precisely what's being discusse din other threads on where we'd like ot take CAP as a whole. Iowa is doing the best they can inside the limits of the existing CAP PD program & that's great work.
Bump
How about an update on the Command and Staff Leadership Institute that was to start in January? How is it going so far? Any major problems?
A general update on the whole program would also be nice.
well this has been a busy year operationally. Iowa responded to our winter storm, and we were operational for seven days. We also were very involved in the search for able (ISU student).
the wing is currently undergoing our Compliance Inspection. I'm sure more will be posted at the conclusion of this exciting weekend ;D
I made a presentation on The Iowa Project based on the materials I got from y'all at the Mississippi Wing Conference. It was pretty well received by most who were there. There were also some reps from Region and National who seemed pretty interested, including Susan Easter, who asked for copies of my powerpoint and other materials. I hope that they liked it... (So far I haven't seen any black vans following me around or parked down the street :o) So we'll see where it leads.
It was also interesting that Ms. Easter's presentation from the Exec. Director contained a lot of the ideas put forth in the original report, and the Region Commander had a few more in his presentation.
Any chance we could see the presentation?
If anyone wants the powerpoint, send me a pm with your email address and I'll get you a copy.
Personally, I think that the whole Iowa Wing is a great example. I don't see how the CAP Officer Corp can be an example of a leadership organization (especially to cadets) if Officers don't have the background or training for leadership, an advanced understanding of customs/courtesies and drill and ceremonies, and physically fit. There's no disadavantage whatsoever to incorporating a PT program and PT standards for Officers in CAP. It's a healthy, beneficial lifestyle.
I'm not a big fan of the Navy, but to be honest, I think that they're Sea Cadets program is the perfect example of what the CAP Officer Corps should be.
#1 Every new member joining the Officer Corps, does not initially get involved as an officer. They have to go through a year's worth of training and instructor courses (unless they have a military background), and THEN if they are selected and want to commit more of their self to the program... they go through a formal "Commissioning Ceremony" and are "Appointed and sworn in as an Officer." If they don't have the time or interest in being an Officer, they can remain as an instructor.
#2 In order to join and be an instructor or officer, you have to maintain their PT requirements. I think that's great, because no one thinks a uniform looks good if it doesn't fit the person. It doesn't look professional, and it doesn't set a good example. If you're going to wear a uniform, you should wear it proud, consider it a priviledge. Afterall, you are representing the United States and don't want to be giving the wrong impression to others who might see you in that uniform. I wouldn't want OTHER people talking about how crappy CAP is and what a joke it is (which they already do) because the members who are in it disgrace the uniform they're wearing. I'm sure this is part of the reason the Air Force doesn't like the fact that we're wearing their uniform... because there are too many people disgracing the uniform.
#3 Since the Sea Cadets are an extension of the US Navy, their uniforms are EXACTLY identical to US Navy Officers except for a small patch signifying them as a Sea Cadet Officer, etc. Other than that, they where the EXACT same uniform. Same badges, same rank, same medals, same uniforms. After all they are sponsored by the US Navy. Personally CAP was formed as an "extension" of the US Air Force... why is everyone trying to sever that tie? We SHOULD be trying to work MORE with the Air Force, instead of coming up with our own separate rules which seem to be segrating us more.
To me, it just doesn't make sense to me why so many members want to make CAP a more "civilianized" organization. The roots were from the Air Force, we're supossed to be supporting them. If you don't like it, TOUGH! If you have a problem with the Air Force, or the military... why the hell are you in CAP? It's not the "Civilian Air Patrol..." it's the United States Air Force Auxilary Civil Air Patrol. DEAL WITH IT!
Just my take.
The idea of a CAP where people work up from enlisted grades to officers has been suggested before along with a whole host of other alternatives. The heck is in the transition to it. What happens to people with established grade/rank at present? What about NCOs? DO pilots get advanced promotions? These are elements that must be addressed.
Sea Cadets is too different an organization to compare to CAP directly, different objectives than CAP. CAP has additional requirements and a different congressional mandate.
Good suggestions...but one would need to tweak the concept and measure it against the realities in CAP. That is likely why we are here. ;)
Remember, too, that in the Sea Cadets, young people join at enlisted ranks and progress only through the grade of chief petty officer. Cadets do not hold any kind of officer grade; neither do adults hold any kind of enlisted grade. The separation between cadets and their adults is that -- cadets are enlisted, adults are officers (or warrant officers or instructors).
Also, for those who accept rank as an indication of training and/or progression, Sea Cadet officer ranks only go through lieutenant commander (read major for us). And you have to have an act of God or Congress to get yourself initially advanced to lieutenant commander; most get ensign or at most lieutenant j.g. after their year prior to officer appointment.
The parallels aren't very parallel; their organization serves their purpose, while our organization serves ours.
Jack
[HIJACK]
Quote from: USAF-LT-G on April 24, 2007, 04:53:08 AM
The roots were from the Air Force,
Sorry, CAP predates the Air Force, our roots have always been a Civilian Organization. If you wanted to say so, you could say our roots are with the Army or Civil Defense.
Quote
If you don't like it, TOUGH! If you have a problem with the Air Force, or the military... why the hell are you in CAP? It's not the "Civilian Air Patrol..." it's the United States Air Force Auxilary Civil Air Patrol. DEAL WITH IT!
I do believe it is "Civil Air Patrol, United States Air Force Auxiliary." No one has a problem with the military, just making the organization into something it's not. It's not the "Civilian Air Patrol?" are you sure...last I checked...Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but we are "full time" CAP, and "Part-time" USAF Aux.
Quote from: dictionary
Civil: of citizens in their ordinary capacity, or of the ordinary life and affairs of citizens, as distinguished from military and ecclesiastical life and affairs.
"distinguished from military life...," the rest of the definitions make it a point to distinguish "civil people" from military ones, making a clear distinction. Thus being...*gasp* CIVILIANS!
[/hijack]
Just my take ;)
EDIT: Add "or Civil Defense"
Quote from: jimmydeanno on April 24, 2007, 12:23:07 PM
Sorry, CAP predates the Air Force, our roots have always been a Civilian Organization. If you wanted to say so, you could say our roots are with the Army or Civil Defense.
FYI...
The concrete plan for a general aviation organization
designed to aid the U.S. military at home was envisaged in 1938 by Gill Robb Wilson. Wilson, then aviation editor of The New York Herald Tribune, was on assignment in Germany prior to the outbreak of World War II. He took note of the actions and intentions of the Nazi government and its tactic of grounding all general aviation. Upon returning, he reported his findings to the New Jersey governor, advising that an organization be created that would use the civil air fleet of New Jersey as an augmentative force for the war effort that seemed impending. The plan was approved, and with the backing of Chief of the Army Air Corps General Henry H. "Hap" Arnold and the Civil Aeronautics Authority, the New Jersey Civil Air Defense Services (NJCADS) was formed. The plan called for the use of single-engine aircraft for liaison work, as well as coastal and infrastructure patrol. General security activities regarding aviation were also made the responsibility of the NJCADS.
Quote
I do believe it is "Civil Air Patrol, United States Air Force Auxiliary." No one has a problem with the military, just making the organization into something it's not. It's not the "Civilian Air Patrol?" are you sure...last I checked...Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but we are "full time" CAP, and "Part-time" USAF Aux.
see above, we were called to Aid the US Military.
Quote
Civil: of citizens in their ordinary capacity, or of the ordinary life and affairs of citizens, as distinguished from military and ecclesiastical life and affairs.
"distinguished from military life...," the rest of the definitions make it a point to distinguish "civil people" from military ones, making a clear distinction. Thus being...*gasp* CIVILIANS!
Just my take ;)
EDIT: Add "or Civil Defense"
Yea, as if I don't the definition of civil. While your "dictionary" definition is colorful. It doesn't really say much.
There were 2 major reasons for forming the Civil Air Patrol, one of which directly implies the US Air Force Military... or the term "Airmen."
During this time, the Army Air Corps and the Civil Aeronautics Administration initiated two separate subprograms. The first was the introduction of a civilian pilot refresher course and the Civilian Pilot Training Program.
The motive behind this step was to increase the pool of available airmen who could be placed into military service if such a time came. The second step was concentrated more on the civil air strength of the nation in general and called for the organization of civilian aviators and personnel in such a way that the collective manpower and know-how would assist in the seemingly inevitable all-out war effort. This second step was arguably the Federal government's blessing towards the creation of the Civil Air Patrol. It was followed by a varied and intense debate over organizational logistics, bureaucracy and other administrative and practical details.
In other words... i'm not making stuff up.
Mind not subverting the curse filter?
The intent was not to doubt the "historical origins" of the CAP, but to question your take on people trying to "civilianize" it. The organization has never been about turning members into members of the military. The word "Civil" was used purposely to distinguish that we are first and foremost "civilians."
Quote from: CAP Constitution
ARTICLE V
OBJECTS AND PURPOSES
1. The objects and purposes of Civil Air Patrol shall be:
a. To provide an organization to encourage and aid American citizens in the contribution of their
efforts, services, and resources in the development of aviation and in the maintenance of aerospace
supremacy.
b. To provide an organization to encourage and develop, by example, the voluntary contribution of
private citizens to the public welfare.
c. To provide aviation and aerospace education and training, especially to its senior and cadet
members.
d. To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities.
e. To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local
and national emergencies.
f. To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its noncombat programs and missions.
Quote
WHEREAS, there exists nationwide a continuing requirement for an organization of private citizens with
adequate training, facilities, and the desire to assist in meeting the trauma of local and national
emergencies; and,
WHEREAS, Civil Air Patrol is designated as the civilian auxiliary of the United States Air Force under
10 USC 9441 which authorizes various Air Force support and designates Civil Air Patrol and its members
as instrumentalities of the United States while performing Air Force non-combat missions.
Quote
The name of the Corporation shall be "Civil Air Patrol" and its status is that of the volunteer civilian
auxiliary of the United States Air Force.
No where in our current "purpose" does it mention turning our members into members of the military, or making them into a military reserve. I agree, that one of our purposes is to assist the USAF. No one is contending that fact. If you try to eliminate the "civilian" side of CAP, you eliminate the core of the program and it becomes another branch of the military.
There is a big difference in operating in a military style environment and "being in the military." I would say to you, "If you don't like it, TOUGH! If you have a problem with what the organization is... why the hell are you in CAP? DEAL WITH IT!"
Members should however, act in a manner that is outlined in our regulations and manuals. This includes CAPP 151.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program...
I'm not suggesting "turning a civilian" into a "Military" member. However, I am suggesting that since we ARE technically a part of the Air Force, regardless of how loosely a tie that has become. More standards should be in place. There's no reason to not be in somewhat of physical shape to wear a uniform. There's no reason not to have training in place instead of just "handing out" rank. I think it's pathetic that cadets don't have "so-called" officers to look up to, or seek advice on things such as drill-ceremonies on. There's no reason an officer should not know these basics. An officer should know what it's like to deal with crunched time-management just as a cadet does. An officer should be held to higher standards than a cadet is. I'm suggesting that people who join CAP should be joining to better themselves and to better others. Not to stay the same old average joe, eating doughnuts every morning, and being lazy. CAP shouldn't be just "another organization" like the Elks club, or a social club... because it's supossed to be so much more. It is supossed to be an organization that teaches what an ideal citizen should be, and it should be an organization others look up to and want to be involved in. Doing the bare minimum never got anyone anywhere... people should WANT to better themselves, and I think that since we already have the USAF authorization to wear uniforms, play in their missions, and take part in the customs... that we SHOULD want to be the leaders that we signed up to be.
I'm not trying to be arrogant, I'm trying to make a point. And I agree with CAPP 151 statement, except that people should FOLLOW it. Not do half of it... or a portion of it, or trim the edges with it. If you're going to wear the uniform, you have to play by the rules.
Here's just an FYI as well. Rules and Regulations aren't open to interpretation. Everyone has a natural sense of what is right and wrong. While CAP Rules and Regulations are not written "EXACTLY" clear every time... they're not supossed to be manipulated to fit the needs of those seeking ways around them. That being said... more "Attention to Detail" should be considered in the regulations. But in all seriousness, EVERONE knows deep down what a regulation is REALLY trying to say. People shouldn't assume the opposite, and do something completely other than what the regulation was intended for.
^AGREED! ;D
Gentlemen, While I appreciate the Rambo attitude of some on the Board, I must remind them that a lot of the productive members of CAP are 50-70 years old, over weight, out of shape, and grey haired. Some of these members have over 30 years in CAP and know what they are doing. Some of them wear the golf shirt and gray slacks. Some of them have started squadrons that wouldn't be here otherwise. Some members can do nothing about their physical conditioning due to illnesses, hormones, etc., anymore than they can about their grey hair. One of our best communications officers in Palm Beach County in the 70's was a blind member that also was a radio operator for the Civil Defense. I really think you need to get over the "Fit to Fight" mentality and start appreciating the talent we have. Most of these old members that are out of shape were at one time in the military and in shape and fought for our country. Age is not something to be ashamed of. Respect it. Most of them could probably have kicked your butts at your age. So get over it. As usual, JMHO
The CAP phsyical fitness program isn't just designed for cadet PT tests, but is designed to promote a physical fitness routine and attitude among the whole membership.
You are right that some people in the organization can not help their weight due to illness and such, but those who can should make a concerted effort to keep themselves healthy. Being "fit to fight" is more than looking good in your uniform, its about keeping yourself healthy to perform the mission you signed up for. Its about holding yourself to a professional level so that others can depend on you.
Even at the age of >60 all doctors will tell you that maintaining a healthy lifestyle includes phsyical activity. That doesn't mean a 75 year old man with arthritis needs to run a 5:30 mile (that's 5 minutes and 30 seconds, not 5 hours and 30 minutes ;D ), but should do what they are capable of doing.
I don't think that the Lt was implying that all members be the next Arnolds, but when wearing a uniform (no matter which one, golf shirts or AF Blues) should wear it the way it's supposed to be worn, with pride. This means doing what you can to present a "good" appearance in that uniform.
I truly appreciate all the hard work and dedication that our "older" members put in, and I completely agree that many squadrons, etc would not be here without those people.
I don't think that you would contest his other statements about providing better training to those individuals, and becoming the leaders we should be, part of being that leader is leading by example, and that includes doing what you can to promote a healthy lifestyle to your membership.
And this has to do with Iowa Wing CAP how?
(http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_44_9.gif)
Iowa has completed its CI with an overall grade of Successful (is that the term we are using these days). The final report should be out in a few weeks.
Our last WTA was a success graduating several new scanners, observers, and ground team members.
Finally the over our evaluated exercise is looming over the horizon.
it has been a busy spring for the Iowa wing
one more thing...
The Iowa legislature has passed our appropriation, and it is waiting to be signed by the Governor. This year the Iowa wing got a raise. for the next fiscal year we will receive $120,000
A $20K raise to the $100K you already get. You must be doing something right over there. What's your secret.
Congrats.
Quote from: flapsUP on April 30, 2007, 02:07:59 AM
A $20K raise to the $100K you already get. You must be doing something right over there. What's your secret.
Congrats.
Making our "Customers" happy.
Providing top notch training.
Responding to all missions with the same fortitude and vigor.
Timly After Action Reports.
Excellent Officers and Cadets
Just to name a few....
I go away for a little bit and the posting starts to get heated.
Just a little note on our cadets, the cadets of the Des Moines Metro Cadet Squadon just took 2nd place at Region Color Guard Comp!!
Good work!!
We are getting called on the front end of many missions in Iowa. At 0600 on the Saturday of our April WTA we were alerted for ANOTHER missing ISU student. As we mobilized to move teams and equipment to Ames the subject was found (at approximately 0800 hours).
This past week on Friday we were alerted for two missing boaters in Brushy Creek State Park. They had been out all night and reported missing that morning. We had crews ready to leave and the subjects were located down stream from the spillway.
So Iowa CAP is getting a lot of missions and the State appreciates how quickly and professionally we respond (i.e. the recent Abel Bolanos search in Ames).
Props to IOWA! Taking a broken and downright crappy program and turning it around takes alot of hard work. I fully suspect the "Iowa Wing Plan" to come down the wire in an Interim Change Letter. Just like the VA Banker Program.
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on May 01, 2007, 04:59:43 AM
Just a little note on our cadets, the cadets of the Des Moines Metro Cadet Squadon just took 2nd place at Region Color Guard Comp!!
Good work!!
Congratulations!!
Hello,
One of the 'secrets' to Iowa's success, and I am sure LTC Cretilli will agree, was the resurrection of the NCO cadre. Their skill in organization and management made all the difference.
Quote from: Chief Chiafos on May 02, 2007, 10:17:12 PM
Hello,
One of the 'secrets' to Iowa's success, and I am sure LTC Cretilli will agree, was the resurrection of the NCO cadre. Their skill in organization and management made all the difference.
Chief, how many professional adult NCOs do you have in the NCO corps there in Iowa?
Flooding has occurred in SW Iowa along with some tornadoes over the weekend and Iowa CAP has been tasked for photo recon of the affected area.
Iowa CAP supported the Montgomery Counthy EMA today with air recon and flying officials to survey the damage. The Governor has declared the county a disaster area and operations are continuing with regards to photo recon.
I envy some of the things you guys are doing over there. As I remember you've been working on this for a few years. How many more years is it going to take until you are through with your program? How have you been doing? How is your dropout rate? What about your recruitment, are more people joining. Can you give us some data?
Quote from: flapsUP on May 08, 2007, 04:41:31 AM
I envy some of the things you guys are doing over there. As I remember you've been working on this for a few years. How many more years is it going to take until you are through with your program? How have you been doing? How is your dropout rate? What about your recruitment, are more people joining. Can you give us some data?
Critelli will have to give details, but here are a few basic answers.....
The main transition is now complete. We are now in the training phase. Training new officers, training ES work, and becoming NIMS compliant. Drop out rate is negligible, and every 6 months we have a new OTS starting with about 15-30 new officers each time.
It has been a busy week. 17 flight hours in a day and a half in SW Iowa looking at flooding and damage. Even though the rain has stopped the rivers are still rising in some areas. We have flown several local and state officials to survey the damage, including representatives from Congressman Steve King's office to report back to Washington D.C. on the extent of the damage.
We have put the Red Oak Base to the test and a few airports have runways underwater. The helicopter traffic are calling their traffic at "Shenandoah Seaplane Base." Perhaps Alaska could loan us some of those floats they have?
Anyway, we are warming up and drying out so hopefully the rivers will go back into their banks by the weekend.
As always it is good to be a part of Iowa CAP.
Quote from: NIN on May 02, 2007, 10:43:41 PM
Quote from: Chief Chiafos on May 02, 2007, 10:17:12 PM
Hello,
One of the 'secrets' to Iowa's success, and I am sure LTC Cretilli will agree, was the resurrection of the NCO cadre. Their skill in organization and management made all the difference.
Chief, how many professional adult NCOs do you have in the NCO corps there in Iowa?
Can we get an answer to this? How many active NCOs does Iowa have?
Its going to be hard to tell since NCO grade is not recorded on eServices as far as I know.
There are four that I can recall, not exactly precise, but as best as I can do at the moment. And the Chief is correct, they do make a very good resource, and they make a huge difference at the WTA.
Quote from: Al Sayre on May 09, 2007, 04:55:09 PM
Its going to be hard to tell since NCO grade is not recorded on eServices as far as I know.
It was recorded for a MSgt who was in my previous unit. I suppose it has to do with whether or not you are sending the appropriate documentation to NHQ with the CAPF 12 or CAPF 2.
Quote from: RogueLeader on May 09, 2007, 04:58:30 PM
There are four that I can recall, not exactly precise, but as best as I can do at the moment. And the Chief is correct, they do make a very good resource, and they make a huge difference at the WTA.
How, exactly?
Now, I know I'm just an E-8 that doesn't get this "new CAP" stuff, but I can't figure out how NCO/SNCO training is the silver bullet that fixes CAP.
As I have said before, NCO's translate the officers "what to do" into the Airmen's "how to do it." How is IAWG grafting Chiefs between one layer of officers and another? Unofficial authority only goes so far.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 09, 2007, 10:33:41 PMAs I have said before, NCO's translate the officers "what to do" into the Airmen's "how to do it."
That's one function, then there is a nother one similiar to what staff officers do, which is to take the theory the officers are trying to get done & make it executable reatity, and then spit it back from underneath. Plus that guide/mentor thing you do with junior officers.
Quote from: DNall on May 09, 2007, 11:32:30 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 09, 2007, 10:33:41 PMAs I have said before, NCO's translate the officers "what to do" into the Airmen's "how to do it."
That's one function, then there is a nother one similiar to what staff officers do, which is to take the theory the officers are trying to get done & make it executable reatity, and then spit it back from underneath. Plus that guide/mentor thing you do with junior officers.
Yes....but that guide/mentor thing only works if you have some sort of moral/experience/age/skill advantage over the junior officers. In CAP that is simply just not the case.
Take me for example.
I am a 41 year old MSgt with 21 years in...I've been there and done that. So when I am mentoring the young Lt's and Capts, I have the advantages of being a technical expert in my field, 21 years experience of doing that job and 41 years of living.
Now let's look at my CAP profile. I got about 4 years in. I am almost one of the youngest officers in my squadron (I am in a senior squadron), the professional pilots, ham radio expert class license holders, professional school teachers, doctors, nurses and business men who join my squadron are already technical experts in their fields. The only advantage I have would be my 4 years working with CAP compared to their 1 year or less.
As for NCO's doing staff officer work....well....what would the staff officers then do?
The question is not whether these IOWA NCO's were instrumental in making the IOWA Experiment work or not....the question is could they have NOT gotten the same results if they were Lts, Capts, or Majs.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 09, 2007, 10:33:41 PM
As I have said before, NCO's translate the officers "what to do" into the Airmen's "how to do it." How is IAWG grafting Chiefs between one layer of officers and another? Unofficial authority only goes so far.
Particularly when there is very little (read as: next to none) "NCO culture" in CAP. CAP Officers who are not prior military generally have zero clue how adult NCOs fit into the "big picture," and the rub there is usually that they do not use the NCO in the proper manner, or the NCO is seen as "supernumerary" or "meddlesome" or something else. And its not because the NCO doesn't know how to manage "NCO business," its that we have too many 2nd Lts, 1st Lts & Captains who already fullfill that niche in CAP, and "NCO business" gets done by junior company grade officers instead.
It will take more than 4 NCOs to change that nationwide.
It will take a massive paradigm shift and a cultural change to the organization. As anybody will tell you, cultural change in an organization the size of CAP, with the level of entrenchment that we have, does not take place overnight. We're talking 3-5 years....
Quote from: lordmonar on May 10, 2007, 05:36:02 AM
Quote from: DNall on May 09, 2007, 11:32:30 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 09, 2007, 10:33:41 PMAs I have said before, NCO's translate the officers "what to do" into the Airmen's "how to do it."
That's one function, then there is a nother one similiar to what staff officers do, which is to take the theory the officers are trying to get done & make it executable reatity, and then spit it back from underneath. Plus that guide/mentor thing you do with junior officers.
Yes....but that guide/mentor thing only works if you have some sort of moral/experience/age/skill advantage over the junior officers. In CAP that is simply just not the case.
I'd disagree STRONLY with your word "only" in that sentence, as well as the framing. Obviously it's much easier with a young & dumb 22yo Lt that's 2 years in the Air Force, but you bet your butt that the CMSAF guides & mentors whole bunch of four-stars.
At this point you should very well understand how to lead your boss, or anyone else you don't have authority over. I didn't mean that NCOs should do staff officer work, but rather lie staff officers they should lead their boss from underneath. It's a differnt process than simply issuing an order, but you do very much have a degree of control over people that does not come from your age/experience/etc alone, but your ability to lead them respectfully to the right answers, and the credibility you earn, not based on your resume, but on the respect you establish for yourself as a man.
I'm 31, and very effectively lead/mentor officers much older than me, who may be prior service, who have all sorts of quals, etc. Establish a command presence for yourself & lead like you would for peers & superiors.
Also, about your framework, you're selling yourself very short if you don't think 21 years in the military & service as a SNCO in the AF especially is not a distinct advantage over 95% of people in the organizaiton including LtCols that have spent 20 years in CAP. You have a lot to teach us from your experience, just as there may be some things you need to learn from others with a different background, and in the end we'll come out strnger as a team.
QuoteThe question is not whether these IOWA NCO's were instrumental in making the IOWA Experiment work or not....the question is could they have NOT gotten the same results if they were Lts, Capts, or Majs.
Well, maybe. I'd certainly have to believe the same people could accomplish the same task no matter what they're wearing, but being NCOs rather than just another officer set them apart. It made them distinctive in a way that wveryone else could see what they were about & what they were there to do. That's important I think, or was in that case anyway.
That's Chief's plan to carry that forward to the nation. And by the way, on a per-capita basis, their 4 NCOs translate to 530 nationwide, and yes I think it takes more then that, but thats a good start. Put an NCO advisor or CAP-RAP in every Sq & have them drive the process toward the way it should work in a military unit versus the way it does work in CAP, and yeah then I think you're making progress. Pull those units up to see each other on the Gp or Wg level like Iowa does, and I think you get a lot of the attitudes drifting away. Yes, some people leave in that process, but then a whole new class of people come in as well.
^^ While we are at it, lets get the local SQD's to start doing the same thing. Instead of 25 SQD's operating totally different and unique, lets get a program that says, here is the "master schedule" these are the things your units need to complete, here is how you should be teaching this or that. THEN the local SQD Commander says, we have these things to do, we are to do it this way......here is how we should carry out our directives.
When members from different units in a Wing meet up, the "my SQD does it this way, or my SQD does it that way" should NOT be going on. A brand new member from SQD A should receive the same training a new member from SQD B gets. Granted there are going to be instances of locality differences, because the varied communities the SQD serves.
New training manuals should be written that go specifically with grade level and functional area. So....there is a manual for a 2nd Lt, that lists things he or she should be doing to advance to 1st Lt and has the written curriculum that he or she needs to read. Then there is a separate manual that details exactly what a Cadet Programs officer does, and is way more detailed than what we have now. Those pamphlets are just not cutting it.
Sorry to go off on a tangent! Resume discussing the Iowa Plan. They are making good advances out there, and I hope within a year NHQ introduces the "Iowa Wing Organizational Plan" to all Wings. It would follow how the "Virginia Wing Banker Plan" was introduced to us. It sure would standardize the whole CAP Organization, and make us all part of CAP, instead of "MY WING".
Quote from: mikeylikey on May 10, 2007, 08:03:25 PM
^^ While we are at it, lets get the local SQD's to start doing the same thing.
So standardization. That's a big part of what IGs are supposed to do, but we need some serious command staffs to put that kind of power into the system. You saw Iowa have problems with Sqs that didn't want to get with the program & thought they had it better their own way. (tailored to their location & situation). You're going to demonstrate our major discipline problems as soon as you start down that standardization road. And that needs to be addressed with better initial entry training, which a lot of people have talked about with varrious ideas.
QuoteNew training manuals should be written that go specifically with grade level and functional area. So....there is a manual for a 2nd Lt, that lists things he or she should be doing to advance to 1st Lt and has the written curriculum that he or she needs to read. Then there is a separate manual that details exactly what a Cadet Programs officer does, and is way more detailed than what we have now. Those pamphlets are just not cutting it.
There's a reg, easy ref chart, and form covering what you have to do to progress. That's the prof dev program, and it's pretty simple. I'd certainly argue, and have vigorously, that it needs to be MUCH more involved & close to on par with the military (like NG officer standards versus active). I understand also that the spec tracks are total crap & that whole training process is pretty worthless. The intent is there, but not much to work with in making it a reality, which it never has been. I've also been involved in some dsicussions around here on revising those to a 4 level system w/ apprentice underneath to accomplish the tech level orientation & not earn a badge, then tech level is up closer to Sr & means you can do that job w/ zero supervision at the Sq level, new Sr & Master levels on top of that which take it to a new higher level. Integrate mission related tasks in the tracks (ex - personnel & admin should get training toward MSA & FASC). And add a specialty track manager at the Wg/Gp level seperate from the staff positon for that area, with the resp to oversee & coordinate training & mentor assignments for everyone working in their particular track area.
Quote from: DNall on May 10, 2007, 06:41:51 PM
Quote from: lordmonar on May 10, 2007, 05:36:02 AM
Quote from: DNall on May 09, 2007, 11:32:30 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 09, 2007, 10:33:41 PMAs I have said before, NCO's translate the officers "what to do" into the Airmen's "how to do it."
That's one function, then there is a nother one similiar to what staff officers do, which is to take the theory the officers are trying to get done & make it executable reatity, and then spit it back from underneath. Plus that guide/mentor thing you do with junior officers.
Yes....but that guide/mentor thing only works if you have some sort of moral/experience/age/skill advantage over the junior officers. In CAP that is simply just not the case.
I'd disagree STRONLY with your word "only" in that sentence, as well as the framing. Obviously it's much easier with a young & dumb 22yo Lt that's 2 years in the Air Force, but you bet your butt that the CMSAF guides & mentors whole bunch of four-stars.
Negetive...GR. Even chiefs know their limits. Granted the CSAF leans heavily on the CMSgtAF...but there is very little "mentoring" going on.
Quote from: DNall on May 10, 2007, 06:41:51 PMAt this point you should very well understand how to lead your boss, or anyone else you don't have authority over. I didn't mean that NCOs should do staff officer work, but rather lie staff officers they should lead their boss from underneath. It's a differnt process than simply issuing an order, but you do very much have a degree of control over people that does not come from your age/experience/etc alone, but your ability to lead them respectfully to the right answers, and the credibility you earn, not based on your resume, but on the respect you establish for yourself as a man.
It's called the truth. You give them the best answer you can for their problems, give them your truthful opinion of the subject, your recommendation based on your experience and skills and then you wait for them to make THEIR decision.
Don't be telling me how to lead and mentor in the Air Force. But as we all know...CAP is NOT the Air Force.
Quote from: DNall on May 10, 2007, 06:41:51 PMI'm 31, and very effectively lead/mentor officers much older than me, who may be prior service, who have all sorts of quals, etc. Establish a command presence for yourself & lead like you would for peers & superiors.
I too very effectively lead and mentor officers older than myself. But if I were just a CAP MSgt I would not be nearly as effective as I am. As Shorning said....there are many out there who do not really know the real NCO relationship in the real military. And
Quote from: DNall on May 10, 2007, 06:41:51 PMAlso, about your framework, you're selling yourself very short if you don't think 21 years in the military & service as a SNCO in the AF especially is not a distinct advantage over 95% of people in the organization including LtCols that have spent 20 years in CAP. You have a lot to teach us from your experience, just as there may be some things you need to learn from others with a different background, and in the end we'll come out strnger as a team.
Yes....and in the current CAP envirnoment...I will be more effective doing just that as a Capt then I would as a MSgt.
Quote from: DNall on May 10, 2007, 06:41:51 PMQuoteThe question is not whether these IOWA NCO's were instrumental in making the IOWA Experiment work or not....the question is could they have NOT gotten the same results if they were Lts, Capts, or Majs.
Well, maybe. I'd certainly have to believe the same people could accomplish the same task no matter what they're wearing, but being NCOs rather than just another officer set them apart. It made them distinctive in a way that wveryone else could see what they were about & what they were there to do. That's important I think, or was in that case anyway.
I think that you hit on the key part of this. Being an NCO in CAP is way way to set someone apart from the crowd. Sort of like the NBB beret or the Hawk Mountain T-shirt.
I don't really have a major problem with instituting an NCO corp in CAP....but it should be for everyone...either as a stepping stone or as option a sort of career track. Otherwise (leaving it for only retired/former/current AD NCOs) it only turns into an exclusive gloat club with not defined duties and no way to progress and no way to control.
Quote from: DNall on May 10, 2007, 06:41:51 PM
That's Chief's plan to carry that forward to the nation. And by the way, on a per-capita basis, their 4 NCOs translate to 530 nationwide, and yes I think it takes more then that, but thats a good start. Put an NCO advisor or CAP-RAP in every Sq & have them drive the process toward the way it should work in a military unit versus the way it does work in CAP, and yeah then I think you're making progress. Pull those units up to see each other on the Gp or Wg level like Iowa does, and I think you get a lot of the attitudes drifting away. Yes, some people leave in that process, but then a whole new class of people come in as well.
What plan? I asked about a plan when the Chief first posted here about his ideas to revive the NCO corps and all I got was "you should know what your need to do". Sure...lets create a squadron, group, wing, regional NCO position. Let's get it into CAPR 20-1. Define their roles and responsibilities, let's educate our commanders on how to use them, develop the NCO professional development programs, rank progression system and then I'll be all over it.
Until then I'll not screw with a system that works.
Gentlemen
I'll try to give you our experiences and views. The CAP-NCO corps was one of the most important things we did. We have the benefit of four NCO's who combined have nearly a century of NCO experience in getting things done in an efficient, orderly manner.
For example, it is not unusual to get nearly 75% of the entire Wing at a WTA. That's a lot of people in one place at one time. Think of the logistics, food requirements, health issues, etc. not to mention keeping them busy. This takes a strong and effective infrastructure. No one over here had that type of personal experience. As past president of the State Bar I've ran 10,000 person voluntary organization...but with a 25 person full time paid staff. IAWG has one part time wing administrator. I've hosted conferences and seminars for 1000..thanks to a fine hotel staff. We don't have that benefit. No amount of CAP training is going to prepare you for that constant logistical nightmare. Then came the Chief and his NCO's It was incredible. They immediately took over and got things organized. It was like watching a sheep dog herd sheep....methodical.
NCO's bring operational organization. Now at the WTAs leadership has the time to create strategic plans, operational plans, etc. in an environment that runs smoothly.
I'm all in favor of a CAP NCO corps.
Nick Critelli
Someone wanted an update on the IAWG's progress.
The reorg was a two phased six year project. Phase I concerned building personal and operational relationships between the IAWG and state and local government and creating a legal framework to facilitate the relationship. The three year Phase I closed out last year.
Phase II turns our focus internally to create a Wing-centric consolidated operational theory. As you know whenever possible we attempted to apply traditional business organizational concepts, e.g. expectations, accountability, etc. in a vertical integration manner to the CAP structure. Thus the need for the infamous field grade officer transition order, WTA's, OTS, ICAPA and many more. We estimated that Phase II would also take 3 years. We will close year one of Phase II this fall. It is still too early to have any meaningful historical record. However we are starting to see the the fruits of our labor:
1. The number of non AF missions have skyrocketed. We are now involved in almost all serious SARs in Iowa. By serious SARs I mean multi-agency missing person missions with multi operational days. Those are up from an average of .03 annually from 2000 to 2004 to an average of one each quarter from 2005 to present.
2. The number of weather related missions, e.g. multi operational day missions concerning blizzard, floods, tornadoes, etc. has likewise skyrocketed. from nothing prior to 2005 to one a quarter each year to the present.
This translates to an average of a multi day major statewide mission each month. Example, we are in the midst of a week long flood related recon/transport mission at the present time. which came immediately on the heels of another the prior week. Sometimes we go two months between major missions and sometimes they are back to back.
This keeps is extremely busy and we have had to learn about crew rotation, and the importance of communication. So much so that we have had to establish a virtual Mission Command Center just to handle the internal communication, logging, etc. We are experiencing a paperwork nightmare of sorts.
Today I learned that the State EMA readiness and response people have decided to become CAP members so they can better appreciate our capabilities.
Word has gotten out among Iowa's 99 county Emergency Managers that they have full access to CAP's air, ground, communication and mission management capabilities and they like it and are starting to use it.
Frankly, I'm afraid that we may have unleashed a beast...and I'm not being over dramatic. To stay ahead of the game, I am trying to forge training and operational liaisons with NEWG, MNWG, MOWG and ILWG that surround us. Frankly I foresee that we will need them big time in the foreseeable future.
We have determined that the optimum size for the Wing is around 200-250 officers 75% of whom are active. We are approaching that parameter. We believe that the combination of OTS and WTA may have remedied our retention problem. Prior to 2005 we suffered from a 54% dropout rate after the first year. That is now down to 5%.
This year we turn our attention to the CADET PROGRAM and Aerospace mission. ICAPA at the WTA has brought our cadet corp together. The bad news is that we only have 118 active cadets. The good news is that number has been stable for 2 years. We are not losing cadets. We are now trying to find an appropriate organizational structure for ICAPA what will fulfill our criteria of 1. Ease of Administration at the squadron level and wing level; 2. Constitute the best use of our senior officers time and talent; 3. There must be a local presence in some form or another; 4. The program must be high quality and administered on a standardized statewide basis.
5. The program must create a critical mass of Cadets at the squadron level so as to maintain their interest level.
With a great deal of input from NEWG for which we are grateful we believe we can find the right structure shortly. Once that is done we can turn our attention to AE. I personally believe that AE is the "jewel in the crown" and is the common link between ES and CP.
Forgive me if this reads like Warren Buffet's Annual Report to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders but we are excited about what is happening.
Now the best for last.....almost all of the bickering, negative personalities, sourness, complaining, etc. etc. that dogged us is gone. By and large people are upbeat, happy and positive. When there is a complaint it is usually about something that we could be doing better. Best of all people are starting to bring out the best in each other.
October 07 will close out year 1. I am sure we will have a formal report which I will post.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov.
NICK CRITELLI, Lt Col CAP
Chief of Staff -- Iowa Wing
CIVIL AIR PATROL
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on May 11, 2007, 03:18:19 AM
Gentlemen
I'll try to give you our experiences and views. The CAP-NCO corps was one of the most important things we did. We have the benefit of four NCO's who combined have nearly a century of NCO experience in getting things done in an efficient, orderly manner.
For example, it is not unusual to get nearly 75% of the entire Wing at a WTA. That's a lot of people in one place at one time. Think of the logistics, food requirements, health issues, etc. not to mention keeping them busy. This takes a strong and effective infrastructure. No one over here had that type of personal experience. As past president of the State Bar I've ran 10,000 person voluntary organization...but with a 25 person full time paid staff. IAWG has one part time wing administrator. I've hosted conferences and seminars for 1000..thanks to a fine hotel staff. We don't have that benefit. No amount of CAP training is going to prepare you for that constant logistical nightmare. Then came the Chief and his NCO's It was incredible. They immediately took over and got things organized. It was like watching a sheep dog herd sheep....methodical.
NCO's bring operational organization. Now at the WTAs leadership has the time to create strategic plans, operational plans, etc. in an environment that runs smoothly.
I'm all in favor of a CAP NCO corps.
Nick Critelli
A question, which has been brought up before, but not really answered: Would those NCO's have been able to accomplish the same thing if they had been CAP officers instead of CAP NCO's?
Quote from: arajca on May 11, 2007, 04:26:40 AM
A question, which has been brought up before, but not really answered: Would those NCO's have been able to accomplish the same thing if they had been CAP officers instead of CAP NCO's?
Doubtful. Two examples.
1. They wear stripes that were earned in the military (and the Guard knows that) so when they go in to work with the Guard (which around here is about 85-90% enlisted) they have instant credibility to help get things done and make relationships more quickly.
2. The stripes transform them. For example, we had on gentleman who had been with us for several years as a Lieutenant. Not a drain on the Wing, but not a sparkplug either. His uniform was so so and his C&C was so so. He was uncomfortable as an Lt and did not understand what he was supposed to do. One lunch with the Chief and he was convinced to put his stripes on. The next WTA he shows up in New BDU's sporting his stripes. You would swear the Gunny from Full Metal Jacket had squared him away. Now he is a sparkplug that fixes problems behind the scenes and pushes everyone to work harder and gets the job done because he understands what to do as an NCO.
Now I know that this miraculous transformation is not going to happen with every prior NCO, but even if each wing had 2-3 NCO's that operated on this level and at this speed. I think you would enjoy the help.
Adding to what "cyclone" said, the question as to whether the NCO's could have accomplished the if they had remained a CAP officer or joined as one has been give a lot of discussion.
Only they can truthfully answer the question and they say NO. They tell me that they are doing what they have been trained to do. Coming in as an officer puts a whole different dynamic. My initial impression was that it was a difference without a real distinction. After all CAP officers, etc. are not the same as military, there's no UCMJ, rank can be disregarded at will (e.g. 1 LT as squadron cc in charge of LTC) But they and their performance have convinced me otherwise.
It truly one of the best things we did here.
NC
Quote from: cyclone on May 11, 2007, 11:58:33 AM
Doubtful. Two examples.
1. They wear stripes that were earned in the military (and the Guard knows that) so when they go in to work with the Guard (which around here is about 85-90% enlisted) they have instant credibility to help get things done and make relationships more quickly.
2. The stripes transform them. For example, we had on gentleman who had been with us for several years as a Lieutenant. Not a drain on the Wing, but not a sparkplug either. His uniform was so so and his C&C was so so. He was uncomfortable as an Lt and did not understand what he was supposed to do. One lunch with the Chief and he was convinced to put his stripes on. The next WTA he shows up in New BDU's sporting his stripes. You would swear the Gunny from Full Metal Jacket had squared him away. Now he is a sparkplug that fixes problems behind the scenes and pushes everyone to work harder and gets the job done because he understands what to do as an NCO.
I don't know this gentleman, but he sounds sort of ate-up. HE can't get his uniform to look squared away because he had on embroidered bars instead of stripes? Come on! Bad example at the least! He did not do his job correctly, but the addition of stripes "transformed" him over night? What was he doing as a LT that he does not now do as an NCO. It must be very dramatic differences in work for that transformation to take effect.
His C&C were so-so. What does that mean? What changed his customs and courtesies practices over night? Adding stripes? I doubt it!! He was prior-service and an NCO, and his C&C stunk, but he miraculously changed over night!
Wow.....all I have to do to make a so-so CAP Member awesome is throw some stripes on their sleeves. WOOSH....instant awesome CAP Member!
??
Quote from: mikeylikey on May 11, 2007, 03:33:25 PM
Quote from: cyclone on May 11, 2007, 11:58:33 AM
Doubtful. Two examples.
1. They wear stripes that were earned in the military (and the Guard knows that) so when they go in to work with the Guard (which around here is about 85-90% enlisted) they have instant credibility to help get things done and make relationships more quickly.
2. The stripes transform them. For example, we had on gentleman who had been with us for several years as a Lieutenant. Not a drain on the Wing, but not a sparkplug either. His uniform was so so and his C&C was so so. He was uncomfortable as an Lt and did not understand what he was supposed to do. One lunch with the Chief and he was convinced to put his stripes on. The next WTA he shows up in New BDU's sporting his stripes. You would swear the Gunny from Full Metal Jacket had squared him away. Now he is a sparkplug that fixes problems behind the scenes and pushes everyone to work harder and gets the job done because he understands what to do as an NCO.
I don't know this gentleman, but he sounds sort of ate-up. HE can't get his uniform to look squared away because he had on embroidered bars instead of stripes? Come on! Bad example at the least! He did not do his job correctly, but the addition of stripes "transformed" him over night? What was he doing as a LT that he does not now do as an NCO. It must be very dramatic differences in work for that transformation to take effect.
His C&C were so-so. What does that mean? What changed his customs and courtesies practices over night? Adding stripes? I doubt it!! He was prior-service and an NCO, and his C&C stunk, but he miraculously changed over night!
Wow.....all I have to do to make a so-so CAP Member awesome is throw some stripes on their sleeves. WOOSH....instant awesome CAP Member!
??
This will get me canned here.... Mikeylikey....I cannot tell you how wrong you are.
Assuming you have never served in a military unit, you will never know what it is like to belong to a corps. As an NCO you have clear cut objectives, knowledge of what exactly will work vs. what will not work.
As a prior service soldier (Army) I had clear cut knowledge of my job and my tasks. When I became an officer in CAP I didn't know what I was supposed to do.
The same happened with this Lt returned SSgt. As an Officer he had no idea what to do. His Officership suffered, and his appearance and CC suffered as well. Honestly he had a bad rap within the wing.
Now he is SSgt again. He knows what works, what doesn't work as far as getting a job done. He IS an NCO again. Back in the comfort zone he became a better Officer be being an NCO. He has become one of those in the wing that we rely on the most. Give his a task, I have no doubt it will get done.
I challenge all of you, if you have earned NCO stripes, file the paper work, get your stripes back.
It made a difference in One Officer.
In truth this is the classic example of someone being out of their "comfort zone." This is why they kept NCO's as an option - a chance to utilize someone who just didn't want to "play officer."
It could either him being "lost" in a new org or him adopting the standards of those around him. In those cases, something as simple as that could make a big change. However, I don't think it's the optimal solution.
If we could come up with a standardized culture, and a means by which to impart it to new members, I think this would be less of an issue. It would work without setting up a "lower tier" of membership and cover any of our new guys: officers, NCO's and civilians.
Of course we would have to determine our place on the "Volunteer FD to Old Guard" STRACNESS axis...
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 11, 2007, 04:41:06 PM
If we could come up with a standardized culture, and a means by which to impart it to new members, I think this would be less of an issue. It would work without setting up a "lower tier" of membership and cover any of our new guys: officers, NCO's and civilians.
Of course we would have to determine our place on the "Volunteer FD to Old Guard" STRACNESS axis...
Emphasis added by me....
I do not see NCO's membership as a lower tier of membership. In fact to assume that their membership is not equal to an officer is downright wrong.
NCO's have actual experience that is highly valuable to CAP.
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on May 11, 2007, 04:48:41 PM
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 11, 2007, 04:41:06 PM
If we could come up with a standardized culture, and a means by which to impart it to new members, I think this would be less of an issue. It would work without setting up a "lower tier" of membership and cover any of our new guys: officers, NCO's and civilians.
Of course we would have to determine our place on the "Volunteer FD to Old Guard" STRACNESS axis...
Emphasis added by me....
I do not see NCO's membership as a lower tier of membership. In fact to assume that their membership is not equal to an officer is downright wrong.
NCO's have actual experience that is highly valuable to CAP.
Didn't say they weren't valuable to CAP. However:
If we are going to have NCO's, and
If we're going to pretend to be military,
Then, NCO's must defer to officers.
I consider myself to be an expert in my field - through training, experience and education. I consider myself much better in my field than my Captain.
However, while I can suggest and attempt to influence my Captain, she has the costume jewelery and the note from the President and I don't.
NCO's in the military are lower tier - just look at our pay rates. :)
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on May 11, 2007, 04:31:57 PM
This will get me canned here.... Mikeylikey....I cannot tell you how wrong you are.
Assuming you have never served in a military unit, you will never know what it is like to belong to a corps. As an NCO you have clear cut objectives, knowledge of what exactly will work vs. what will not work.
As a prior service soldier (Army) I had clear cut knowledge of my job and my tasks. When I became an officer in CAP I didn't know what I was supposed to do.
The same happened with this Lt returned SSgt. As an Officer he had no idea what to do. His Officership suffered, and his appearance and CC suffered as well. Honestly he had a bad rap within the wing.
Now he is SSgt again. He knows what works, what doesn't work as far as getting a job done. He IS an NCO again. Back in the comfort zone he became a better Officer be being an NCO. He has become one of those in the wing that we rely on the most. Give his a task, I have no doubt it will get done.
I challenge all of you, if you have earned NCO stripes, file the paper work, get your stripes back.
It made a difference in One Officer.
I have and continue to serve in an Officer Corps. That is not a point. The point is, CAP Officers are totally different than AD Officers. The skills are learned as a CAP Officer through experience in the program and dedication. This NCO you are referencing seemed to not have the dedication. It takes dedication and attention to make sure your uniform looks good. He lacked that. As an NCO.....he should have transfered over his C&C and uniform skills. No difference between Officer and NCO C&C and uniform prep. Granted different terms and different uniform items of course, but the same skills for both are needed. He could have taken the time to learn what was require of him as a CAP Senior Member. Instead he chalked up his lack of preparation to "I was an NCO.....what I did has no bearing on the CAP Officer corps".
Quote from: ddelaney103 on May 11, 2007, 05:15:59 PM
I consider myself to be an expert in my field - through training, experience and education. I consider myself much better in my field than my Captain.
However, while I can suggest and attempt to influence my Captain, she has the costume jewelery and the note from the President and I don't.
NCO's in the military are lower tier - just look at our pay rates. :)
I hardly think of my insignia as costume jewelry. Anyway....you may think you are better than your Officers, but they are paid more to make sure you are an expert in your field. Officers are generalists in a vast area of skills, abilities and knowledge that your ONE LITTLE expertise area falls into. I have 12 different MOS fields working under me, and I have to know about each. However, each NCO usually only needs to be concerned with his or her little area. What an enlisted soldier learns at his or her AIT is usually taught to Officers in as little as a week at a Officer Basic Course.
Pay rates are different because of the differences in expectation between Officers and Enlisted. I owe a great deal more to my boss than my NCO's owe to me. I work longer hours, and ultimately when the time comes have to get in front of my soldiers and lead them into war (Which I have done twice). Not to be insensitive, but NCO's work for their Officers, not the other way around.
As far as NCO's in CAP......great, more power to them. However, when it comes down to it, the CAP Officer is still the Officer even if he or she never served a day in the military.
I think the dilemma for AD/retired/former NCOs coming into CAP is that CAP officers don't have a very solid sense of identity.
As long as we have this schizophrenic division between 'corporate' and 'auxiliary' mentalities, this problem will remain.
I can see where an experienced NCO would feel a sense of relief returning to familiar duties --- focusing on the completion of the mission and the care of the members, which is the heart of the NCO's duty -- and getting out of the squabbling political nonsense that all too often characterizes the leadership in groups and wings, and sometimes even squadrons.
A few thoughts.
Sounds like we've boiled down the value of CAP NCOs to three things.
1. They understand "military stuff"
2. They are good at "Organizing Things" like arranging logistics and the like for events.
3. They are good at interfacing with the Guard (presumable as part of #2 above) because they are wearing stripes (like most of the guard guys) and their former service gives them credibility.
Alright, time for the analysis......
1. They understand "military stuff"
A good thing. Of course, so do our members who are former officers. And yet they always seem to get left out of the discussion. We feel comfortable giving anybody Captains bars', but we zealously protect Staff Sergeant stripes to the prior service types. Weird.
2. They are good at "Organizing things" like arranging logistics and the like for events.
No doubt. Of course, we have non-military members who are good at this too. Folks whose real jobs are things like construction foreman, police desk sergeant, or even party planners! And some of them aren't really good at high level policy/admin/vision officer stuff. Seems like they'd be better off as CAP NCOs than CAP Officers. Too bad they won't be allowed in.
And there are NCOs who really don't have a whole lot of NCO experience. I'd LOVE a former infantry platoon sergeant to help organize things. I don't know how much help I'd get from an E-7 financial specialist or bandsmen. Like officers, not all NCOs are created equal.
3. They are good at interfacing with the Guard because they are wearing stripes (like most of the guard guys) and their former service gives them credibility.
This is most definitely true, and in fact was one of the reason given for the NB looking at NCO grade a few years back. They are "in the club." Of course, our former warrant officers and officers have some street cred as well, if you could tell them apart.
So all in all, it's a mixed bag. It's one way to utilize a small group of people to their fullest. But it does ignore two other groups of people (prior military officers and those civilian CAP members who are best suited for NCO work).
So, besides that, is there a downside?
I think possibly yes. We have to avoid the "big head" syndrome.
If the NCO Corps begins to look down on the CAP Officer Corps because of their lack of prior service.
If the NCO Corps begins to operate outside of the chain of command, or think of itself as the guys who can go out to any unit, look around and then tattle to the commander.
If the NCO Corps stops learning about CAP because well, they don't need to.
If the CAP Officers stop doing certain things because it's NCO business, and then they end up in a unit with no NCOs.....
If this stuff can be kept in check, it's probably OK. I hope we can keep this stuff in check.
A system based on the experience only 4 guys may or may not work well when extended nationwide. It may be that Iowa just happens to have 4 really great (but unique) guys.
Nick, thanks for the general update on the program. Regarding the "optimum" size of the wing, upon what is that based? Given the stresses you're beginning to experience under the higher operational tempo, it seems that somewhat more people would be good to have, at least more people doing ES work.
I don't know if this is still current but the CAP homeland security resources page says you only have 16 mission pilots for 7 corporate aircraft. That seems WAY WAY understrength to me though your number of scanners and observers probably isn't too bad (46 & 84).
Quote from: RiverAux on May 11, 2007, 11:02:38 PM
Nick, thanks for the general update on the program. Regarding the "optimum" size of the wing, upon what is that based? Given the stresses you're beginning to experience under the higher operational tempo, it seems that somewhat more people would be good to have, at least more people doing ES work.
I don't know if this is still current but the CAP homeland security resources page says you only have 16 mission pilots for 7 corporate aircraft. That seems WAY WAY understrength to me though your number of scanners and observers probably isn't too bad (46 & 84).
We had a bloated number of mission pilots before we transitioned. Guys who would do a CAPF 5 once a year and a CAPF 91 every 2 and would not be seen since. We also happen to have some guys right now who fell out of CAPF 91 or CAPF 5 on 30 Apr and between WX and other things have not taken one yet. That should bring us up a bit in May.
Now we are re-building our Mission Pilot Corps. We had three trainees at our March / April ES Academy and have four more planned for July / August. I think that this number will continue to get up to where we want to sit at.
In the mean time we are trying not to kill the qualified and current guys. Between all of our pilots we have flown over 20 hours on the current flooding mission with probably another 5-6 to go in the next few days.
RIVERAUX
In response to your question:
As we settled into Phase II we had to take a realistic look at our capabilities. In phase I we made new and better relationships. However we could not know the type and frequency of the missions it would generate. Several things developed. We immediately began getting multi day, multi agency missing persons SAR missions. About six months latter we began getting weather related disaster relief missions. Both required deliverables which translated into a completely different training and response approach. Keep in mind we had been essentially an ELT hunting organization.
The first thing we did was to identify our manning needs for both SAR and WX-DR missions. We did this be creating a Unit Manning Document. (UMD) For example, we determined that a squadron with an aircraft should be able to staff it three deep, i.e. 3MP, 3MO and 3MS. Likewise ground teams should be staffed 2 deep. We also established manning quotas for other staff. Each unit was required to submit the UMD. The UMD was divided into mission staffing and administrative staffing. An analysis of the UMD gave us a very realistic and sometimes shocking picture regarding our strengths and weaknesses. In some situations we had and still have officers that are multi billeted,e.g. holding several positions within the squadron. The UMM allowed us to more truly focus our recruitment efforts. We have now gone to slot recruitment. When a slot is open we target recruit it.
Based on the UMD's we quickly determined that while we had members in some situation they were the wrong kind of members for the positions that were needed. Through the UMD we have seen our squadrons get stronger. By no means are they where they need to be. But we now we have plan to get them where the need to be instead of leaving it up to blind luck.
The last time I looked most of our squadrons are at around 48% of UMD standard for both mission and around 55% for administrative positions.
Iowa has 99 counties which are divided into six regions of around 17 counties each. We have assigned a squadron that has an aircraft to each region and advised the region emergency coordinator that the squadron is "theirs." They now have their own field force for the tasking. As anticipated we are starting to see requests for CAP tasking and has put a lot of hours on the books. But like I said earlier, we may have unleashed a monster. For the time being we can control it because all requests for our services must be up channeled from the local EM Director to the State Emergency Management Director or the Iowa National Guard. They act as filter.
Right now our biggest problem is a lack of CAP agency liaisons or CAP incident commanders. We have very few who are trained in what we do and how we do it.
If you want a copy of the UMD give me instructions on how to post it or e-mail me at ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov
NICK CRITELLI, Lt Col CAP
Chief of Staff -- Iowa Wing
CIVIL AIR PATROL
I really like the UMD concept and have tried something similar locally in the past -- it was really scary when you looked at readiness in that fashion and wasn't much different than the figures you posted.
Personally, I think 3 deep in the aircrew and 2 deep in the ground team is too shallow. It is probably good enough for a majority of potential missions, but not all.
I think 5-6 deep for aircrew and 3 deep for ground team provides you a much better chance at being able to 100% guarantee a response, especially for multiple-day missions. But, you've got to start somewhere.
How do you post documents here anyway?
Quote from: RiverAux on May 13, 2007, 04:55:00 AM
How do you post documents here anyway?
Right below the window where you type in your message is "Additional Options..." Click that and you'll see "attach:" with a box and a browse button.
Attached is the IAWG UMD Document. Creative credit goes to Capt. Jeffery L. Schwan of NCR-IA-043.
Have every unit complete a UMD analyze them all and you will have an objective and possibly shocking picture of your Wing's readiness and preparedness.
/s/ Nick Critelli
NICK CRITELLI, Lt Col CAP
Chief of Staff -- Iowa Wing
CIVIL AIR PATROL
On the staff side, do assistants/interns count? For example, a unit has one ESO and two other training for the position as assistants. How would this be recorded?
QuoteOn the staff side, do assistants/interns count? For example, a unit has one ESO and two other training for the position as assistants. How would this be recorded?
The situation never presented itself. It's up to Wing Leadership who is setting the Wing's readiness and preparedness standards to determine how they wish to handle it.
BTW Let me explain Readiness and Preparedness as IAWG applies the concept. The Wing is responsible for Preparedness which consists of all education and training for all members. Squadrons are responsible for Readiness which consists of practicing those newly acquired skills. Training without consistent practice is a waste of time. Skills learned are quickly lost. Further squadrons are also responsible for ensuring that their component is ready to answer the mission call when made. In other words, they must be "mission ready".
NC
This weekend Iowa Wing underwent its bi-annual Air Force Evaluated Operations Exercise. I am happy to report that Iowa Wing was given an overall "Excellent" grade. Additionally IC and Comm was given "Outstanding Ratings" and Finance / Admin and Air Branch were given excellents with every other section being given "Successful" ratings. The evaluators termed those ratings as "Successful Plus" as they debated making more of them "Excellent."
Noted items that the evaluators liked were:
1. Teamwork, they liked how well the staff and teams functioned together without bickering or disorganization.
2. Flexibility, winds at the base airport went out of the maximum cross-wind component for the aircraft and they had to be recovered 20 miles away at another airport. The staff sent a staff detachment to manage that new staging area without incident or great interruption.
3. Follow-through. The staff maintained regular hourly staff briefings to maintain continuity and communications. Additionally, it was briefed that check ins were every 30 min on the half and top of the hour. When the evaluators gave one ground team a communications blackout the staff caught it at the next checkin time and deployed assets to locate the team while trying to re-establish communications.
4. Information flow - the information flowed well between the staff. Taskings went to Planning who notified the IC, wrote taskings, and handed them to Ops to be completed. It worked very well.
Although a busy day, everyone had a good time and the wing was VERY pleased with its evaluation.
IAWG was featured in this months issue of the volunteer. the article highlited our mandatory leave of work legislation. If anyone has any questions or comments we would happily answer them.
I have heard that there is a new NOTF article about Iowa. Has anyone sean it?
Quote from: isuhawkeye on June 14, 2007, 11:10:51 PM
I have heard that there is a new NOTF article about Iowa. Has anyone sean it?
Nope, and not interested in NOTF. SIR!!
Yes I have. I have a 2B ready if I find the source of the comments....
I'll just say that it does NOT have anything to do with Testinggate.
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on June 14, 2007, 11:44:52 PM
Yes I have. I have a 2B ready if I find the source of the comments....
Some people believe my 2B comments are too harsh. If you feel that way... PM me directly.
Quote from: flapsUP on November 19, 2006, 02:05:10 PM
I think we've all been scammed by Iowa. I read their papers. There's nothing new in here. They've just went behind the letter of the regulations and got into the spirit of the regs. For example, their WTA. A voluntary monthy meeting where their whole wing gets together. What's so wierd or controversial about that? Look at the other side of the issue, what is really wierd is a wing that meets only once a year...at a Wing Conference. That's wierd. Apparently my wing reads the regs to thing that the Wing Conference is the only time the wing is authorized to meet. We'll change that. >:D
They claim they invented "wing-centric" theory. Wrong...that's what the regs say. The CC is the only corporate officer for CAP and the Wing is his unit. Of course the Wing is the main operational unit in CAP that's how it is organized. Squadrons as tactical tools? Duh..what else would they be. That's what the structure in the regulations call for. The Wing establishes the squadrons. Can't get anymore structured than that. Field grade officers at wing, company grade at squadrons? Hardly innovative here. What is strange would be to have it the other way around.
Iowa has put one over on all of us. They read the regs understood the big picture and followed them. Notice that nowhere in all of these documents did they call for a reg change?
Way to go Iowa. :clap:
If this is the way that the regs say things are to be run, why is Iowa flourishing and the rest of CAP foundering? IAWG has repeatedly said its back to the basics and cut the dead wood. Its not necessarily that they have created anything that didnt already exist, its that they are running things as they are intended to be fun. As has been said, we need to get to the spirit of the regs and have people who truly understand and embody that spirit. If that means more SMs going "triple zero" than thats the way it should be. If it means having an officer who enforces uniform regulations rather than trying to use duct tape and bailing wire on inspection day, so be it. The fact is that IAWG has done something new in the modern era of CAP: they have demanded the excellence, qualifications, training and commitment that are the underpinnings of the entire organization. I venture to say that we need leadership who is not afraid to lead, which may from time to time involved stepping on a few toes or hurting some feelings. And (here come the black suburbans) we also need folks down at Maxwell who do more than take the ideas of others, slap their signature on them and send out a mass email. Semper Vigilans! That is all.
I've got an open mind about what Iowa has been trying to do and some of the things they're trying make a lot of sense, but have been waiting for evidence that their approaching is making a significant impact. I'm not sure I would say that there is much evidence that they are "flourishing" just yet though its promising...
Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of stats to go on, but here is what we've got from the 2005 and 2006 annual reports.
In terms of membership numbers, Iowa grew by 3 members from 2005 to 2006. Nationwide CAP membership declined by 2% and declined by 1% in the North Central Region (mostly due to loss in members in their largest Wing - Minnesota). So, they're going slightly against the trend, but nothing astounding. I know that Iowa is trying to focus on quality, but there is no objective way for an outsider to evaluate that.
What about flying hours?
In 2005 Iowa flew 330 AF hours and flew 575 hours in 2006 an increase of 74% compared to the CAP nationwide rate of a 18%. Actually, I suspect this increase could be because of missions that started out as state missions for which CAP was requested and that when we got it it was under an AFAM. Just a hunch.
In 2005 IA flew 813 corporate hours (which I assume would include state missions) and flew 807 in 2006 -- a decrease of 0.7% compared to a nationwide decrease in corporate hours of 21%. Iowa ranks 3 out of 7 in the number of corporate hours.
Based on these numbers I think Iowa very well could be on the right track but I'm sort of a stats guy (who would have guessed) and would like more detailed info before I fully jump on the bandwagon for some things.
Everyone wants to know about our numbers and it's a legitimate question. Preliminary numbers look stable and support our programs...however I stress that they are preliminary. I will be more comfortable with another year of experience. For example our previous two year new member retention rate was 54%. However the OTS the two year new member retention rate is 94%. Unfortunately not enough time has passed to these numbers are extremely unreliable.
About all you can take from them is that OTS trained officers are much more likely to stay with CAP than non OTS trained officers. This is probably because they have a greater investment in CAP and have a better focus on our mission.
The WTA has been an outstanding success. Attendance percentages depend in large measure on the educational component being offered. However we usually have about 2/3rds of the entire active component (not the reserve squadron) Wing in attendance.
Our gross membership numbers for officers and cadets has been stable for the past two years. We have about 180 active officers and 115 active cadets. We are comfortable with the 180 officers. They are highly trained, motivated and dedicated. We are not at all pleased with the size of the cadet corps. It is far too low and evidences that there is a chronic and systemic problem with CAP cadet's program. Obviously we are trying to remedy the situation. Stay tuned, I am sure you will hear more complaints from the "make no changes" crowd.
The right metrics are critical.
For example, I personally could care less about the size of the senior member force. You should have as many as you need to do the mission. Bigger is not better.
Cadets are a different story - they are a product of our program, and bigger IS better. But, of course, it needs to be balanced with quality training.
I think the kind of metrics that matter include things like
1. Results of higher level inspections, both SAR and Compliance types.
2. # of missions.
3. To a lesser extent, number of successful missions. The assumption being that while there's always an element of luck in finding a search target, better trained folks should be more likely to succeed.
4. # of folks attaining level 4 and 5 - since these require significant effort on the part of the individual, it's a good indirect measure of both the health of PD and member dedication.
5. Number of MOAs in place with outside agencies AND number of MOAs that have actually been used recently.
6. Retention
7. On the cadet side, size of encampment, attendance at NCSAs, the Wing's results in the NCC and Color Guard Competition.
I specifically avoided Cadet Achievements, as the minute you measure those, you put pressure on commanders to promote cadets who aren't ready yet.
Anybody think of any others?
QuoteFor example, I personally could care less about the size of the senior member force. You should have as many as you need to do the mission. Bigger is not better.
Well thats where it gets tricky. Yes, raw total senior membership isn't the best metric, but I do believe it gives you a rough idea of how things are going on a squadron and Wing level. Yes, yes, yes, I know that this will include members who don't contribute much (as we've discussed endlessly), but if you've got a unit that has had declining membership for many years, you're eventually going to have trouble. However, if you've got a unit that is increasing for many years, you are going to be adding some capability even if some of the new folks aren't supermen.
Just how many people do you need to be able to perform our missions? I think that in many places CAP is on the edge of not being able to respond to all missions. We talked about some Iowa numbers a few pages back.
We definetely don't have anywhere near enough ground team qualified members to respond to all the potential missions we could be on. I know of few squadrons that really have enough senior members to run the cadet programs. Heck, there are plenty of towns without CAP units now that could have them if only we had the senior members to run them.
There are two parts of the "Iowa Experiment" that are major show stoppers:
Major support of the TAG.
and
Pull within the state lawmaking system.
One of the major pulls of the WTA's is they treat you like real military - they put you up in housing and feed you. That takes money and facilities: both of which are in short supply in most wings.
Until we came come up with a national system that can replicate this funding, it's just a novelty.
The real novelty would be if national provided us with the funding. Forget it. It hasn't happened in the past and it will never happen in the future.
What are we really? A national organization waiting for a national disaster or a national organization that provides assistance to state and local government or both? I get the impression that some of us think we are the first. Let's face it, national disasters come along infrequently. State and local emergencies and disasters happen daily. Who should foot the bill? State and local government. Iowa was right to grasp this and tapped deeply into it as a funding source. Novelty? I don't think so. Genius is more like it.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 15, 2007, 02:21:07 PM
There are two parts of the "Iowa Experiment" that are major show stoppers:
Major support of the TAG.
and
Pull within the state lawmaking system.
One of the major pulls of the WTA's is they treat you like real military - they put you up in housing and feed you. That takes money and facilities: both of which are in short supply in most wings.
Until we came come up with a national system that can replicate this funding, it's just a novelty.
The third is centralized facilities to do these things. Iowa has it with Camp Dodge (an OUTSTANDING resource) which is
almost in the center of the Wing geographically. Other Wings do not have this luxury.
^^ Your State Directors can get free housing on most bases/posts/installations. Granted you may not be staying in the BOQ/BEQ/VOQ....you will get a place to set down for the night (old WWII barracks maybe). As far as meals go the DFAC's can bargain out prices with the State Director if enough notice is given. Nothing is free......but you have to put some serious time into finding the cheaper resources.
Funding is of course at the heart of everything CAP. So let's dissect the "average WTA" and set the mark at 150 people present, and an "operations" weekend with the Air Force providing funding for transport and training on the A/C and vehicles.
Facilities (Barracks, Orderly Room, Chow Hall, Classrooms, etc): $300
Food: $1,500 for food (we prepare it)
Admin (Copies, supplies, etc): $100
Total Cost / Weekend: $1,900
Cost / person (at 150 people): $13
Even if you go back to the days of passing the hat that's still not bad for a weekend of CAP. Even if your wing did this quarterly I think you would see the difference. The key is to do as much as you can for the month in that one weekend so everyone enjoys a break the other weekends of the month.
You're getting a heck of a deal for the facilities.
^^^ that's one of the benefits with being "in" with the state and the Guard. Senior Members also have the privilege of getting private rooms on base for $10 a night.
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 18, 2007, 06:55:07 PM
^^^ that's one of the benefits with being "in" with the state and the Guard. Senior Members also have the privilege of getting private rooms on base for $10 a night.
I don't care how "in" you are with them - $2.00 a weekend for lodging, including common areas, means some else is picking up the bill. If the TAG is ponying up the funds, you still need to count that
Likewise, $10/weekend for food is also a great deal - though this is mitigated by the fact you're willing to sacrifice member training to get the food prepared.
I don't think your average Wing could conduct such an event for less than $40.00/person for a weekend. That would be 4 $5.00 meals (3 Sat and 1 Sun) and 2 nights at $10 per.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 18, 2007, 07:20:12 PM
I don't care how "in" you are with them - $2.00 a weekend for lodging, including common areas, means some else is picking up the bill. If the TAG is ponying up the funds, you still need to count that
Likewise, $10/weekend for food is also a great deal - though this is mitigated by the fact you're willing to sacrifice member training to get the food prepared.
I don't think your average Wing could conduct such an event for less than $40.00/person for a weekend. That would be 4 $5.00 meals (3 Sat and 1 Sun) and 2 nights at $10 per.
1- We are counting cost to CAP and/or Members.
2- There is some loss to training, but not a lot
a- scheduled around Training
b- quickly made lunches Cold cuts, bought potato salad, mre's, etc.
c- lunch mostly done by unscheduled personnel for time slot.
If you look at it from an officers side think of it this way:
1- State pays gas to and from- $0
2- pays for meals- $0
3- pays for barracks- $0
4- Training/Materials-$0
Cost of Weekend- $0
The only thing lost is money from work, which would have happened anyway, if attended.
But that brings us no closer to reproducing the IAWG plan to anyone else. If the plan has to start, "1. Find a TAG willing to be your Sugar Daddy," this thing is DOA.
Even a quarterly weekend could be of use to create a whole new group dynamic for CAP, but resources are a real killer. I've seen too many help messages going out because some logistical failing at the Tri Wing Encampment to believe that setting up WTA's are as easy as all that.
Quote from: ddelaney103 on June 18, 2007, 10:00:16 PMI've seen too many help messages going out because some logistical failing at the Tri Wing Encampment to believe that setting up WTA's are as easy as all that.
Considering that they've been doing this for a while, it probably really isn't that difficult now, it's no longer a once-in-a-while thing. I imagine it was probably a nightmare initially, most people scratching heads as to what's next. Perfect practice makes perfect.
I think everybody thinks this a good idea, but free base housing has been extremely hard to come by lately. The facilities near us are in constant use by the military and our folks are tearing their hair out every year about whether encampment is going to get cancelled at the last minute for "the needs of the service".
All that aside, I'm just amazed that you've managed to get the people to volunteer to lead all the training each month. For such a small wing, that is a major accomplishment.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 18, 2007, 10:26:55 PMAll that aside, I'm just amazed that you've managed to get the people to volunteer to lead all the training each month. For such a small wing, that is a major accomplishment.
I would agree, it's dedication. I hope people are writing up a dec (or a dozen) for the folks that are taking the time to instruct. People that are putting forward their time need be shown that their service is appreciated.
I think you guys are missing the point. You are focusing on one small part of the end result of the project rather than the project itself. We have all these benefits, e.g. TAG support, funding, etc. because of what we have done.
Our whole message is "make yourself relevant to the powers that be by developing and delivering a service that they need when they need it. "
Over on the other thread I tried to explain why we pushed for U.S. Civil Air Patrol....it enhances our relevancy and acceptability. It's the same reason we dropped "senior member" and went to "officer." Call it branding, packaging or whatever but make your service attractive and acceptable.
NC
QuoteOver on the other thread I tried to explain why we pushed for U.S. Civil Air Patrol....it enhances our relevancy and acceptability.
Sounds nice, but the only reason stated when this was proposed was to avoid confusion with the Brazilian Civil Air Patrol (whose name is in Portugeuse anyway).
Well, I don't know anything about the Brazilian CAP. b I told you guys about this before. We wrote back in January requesting HQ to consider adding the U.S. to the name.
"Working on behalf of CAP with state and local government it has come to my attention that there is some degree of confusion regarding our identity. While many understand our status some do not. Some believe us to be a state organization, i.e. the Iowa Civil Air Patrol yet others believe us to be a private association. "
State and local government were constantly misidentifying us as state entities. The press was all over the place. See, for example "...hundreds of laymen's groups, from the General Electric plant at Erie, Pa., to the New York Civil Air Patrol, to soldiers at Ft. Belvoir, Va., ... (www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,824043,00.html) or "...As the search continues, members of the Nevada Civil Air Patrol and the California Civil Air Patrol are also lending a hand. ...
(www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/20050907/REGION/109070023).
We know they meant the New York Wing of the Civil Air Patrol, etc. etc but that's not the way it comes out. I've seen MOU's and state statutes written in the same manner.
I don't know about "branding" or Brazil, etc." but I do know about the issues that were referenced in our request.
NC
just another clarification.
Our relationship with the TAG came about well after we began the revamp of our wing. This relationship was a direct result of that hard work.
secondly our facilities are in no way free. we are billed the same rate that active duty, guard, and reserve units are billed for facilities.
Lastly we receive no special treatment in reserving our facilities. we get bumped, and re-scheduled. this is a direct result of units preparing for their primary mission. CAP has picked the 4th weekend of the month because that is an off time, and resources are available.
It is hard, though, to make yourself relevant and ready to the state, when the training is not uniformly high standards.
To address the idea of a unified CAP, I think that for the sake of press releases; we use our numbers instead of names. For example, Instead of "Iowa Wing, Civil Air Patrol is . . . ." we would use "XX Wing of . . ." We retain our names on patches, letterhead, leases, etc. This would prevent the impression that there are 52 CAP organizations. WE all know it's one, and so do many people; but there are plenty more who do not.
I think the problem is that too many of us want to adopt the Iowa program as a "turnkey" operation, and that just won't work....they developed a means to an end for a small wing (number wise) in a fairly good size state....and it's working for them.
They have provided some working parameters that can be adapted to local situations...including the degree of support available from state TAG.
For instance, there are undoubtedly wings in which moving all the field grade officers to wing won't work, for various reasons....in Iowa it was a solution, elsewhere it might simply create more problems than it resolves.
Bingo....you've got it right.
Has anybody heard about what Iowa is doing to reinvigorate the CP? It really is a piece of work.
Removed attachment - MIKE
Holy cow. You can't say that some thought hasn't been put into that document, but making every squadron a senior squadron and having 1 statewide cadet squadron with just detachments at the local level seems incredibly risky, for very little return in my book.
I did find one major error in fact. In there it says that all of Iowa's 111 cadets only make up 1 typical successful cadet squadron elsewhere. Last I heard there were only a handful of squadrons in the entire country with more than 100 members total.
Dear Rogue Leader
What are you doing posting our internal Wing documents on the Internet ???
As part of our due diligence this document was put out to the Wing on the Wing's secure Virtual HQ for review and comment prior to Wing Executive Board action and decision by the Wing Commander.
I noticed that it did not say FOUO, or classified. It also does not say what the final outcome will be. If you do believe that this is right, be proud of what was come up with. This seems to be following a pattern of what the Iowa Wing is doing. What Iowa Wing has done, has worked many wonders for the State and the members as well. Iowa has gotten a better retention rate, more state funds, better training. You're doing what you think as best. I figured that if other wings are trying to reorganize, and adapt what Iowa has done, they might think of as much as they can so it is not a huge surprise.
^ I have to agree that if it is published on what seems to be a non-secure system in Iowa.....that is Iowas fault! I guess Iowa does not want non Iowa types to know what is exactly going on out there in Iowa.
No...I think, rather, that Iowa Wing wants to conduct its business & discussions internally, and reach some degree of consensus (or at least submit their recommendation to the Wing CC) before sharing their ideas with the rest of CAP.
This is not an unreasonable position or procedure...however, you are correct that Iowa needs to safeguard their documents, or at least indicate that it is a draft not intended for distribution.
Quote from: mikeylikey on June 20, 2007, 04:03:10 AM
^ I have to agree that if it is published on what seems to be a non-secure system in Iowa.....that is Iowas fault! I guess Iowa does not want non Iowa types to know what is exactly going on out there in Iowa.
There seems to be a major leak of information within the Iowa Wing. The Document mentioned above was posted to a secure network requiring login and password information.
www.civilairpatrol.grouphub.com
Also knowing that NOTF received a tip on this same information, also taken from the same secured network is all very interesting.
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on June 23, 2007, 01:11:42 AM
Also knowing that NOTF received a tip on this same information, also taken from the same secured network is all very interesting.
Really? All the NOTF mentioned was the new testing policy and conjecture of whether it had to do with what happened with TP and RH. Didn't see anything about a new cadet policy, especially as the policy has yet to be decided.
But where did they get THAT information?
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on June 23, 2007, 03:17:02 AM
But where did they get THAT information?
Like I said BEFORE, I didn't even know about it until
after the fact. SIR.
jimmy settle down.
NOTF got the info from cedar rapids which is where all of those silly stoies have come from. no one cares.
RL posted some information that was still in discussion phase. its ok. We dont have any secrets.
You should all just settle down. ;) I do wonder though how long it will be before the uniform tapes say IAWGUS Civil Air Patrol. >:D
Quote from: SARMedTech on June 24, 2007, 08:38:25 AM
You should all just settle down. ;) I do wonder though how long it will be before the uniform tapes say IAWGUS Civil Air Patrol. >:D
In acccordance with Gus? ;D
Mike
Quote from: Nick Critelli, Lt Col CAP on June 19, 2007, 02:44:24 AM
Well, I don't know anything about the Brazilian CAP. b I told you guys about this before. We wrote back in January requesting HQ to consider adding the U.S. to the name.
"Working on behalf of CAP with state and local government it has come to my attention that there is some degree of confusion regarding our identity. While many understand our status some do not. Some believe us to be a state organization, i.e. the Iowa Civil Air Patrol yet others believe us to be a private association. "
State and local government were constantly misidentifying us as state entities. The press was all over the place. See, for example "...hundreds of laymen's groups, from the General Electric plant at Erie, Pa., to the New York Civil Air Patrol, to soldiers at Ft. Belvoir, Va., ... (www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,824043,00.html) or "...As the search continues, members of the Nevada Civil Air Patrol and the California Civil Air Patrol are also lending a hand. ...
(www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/20050907/REGION/109070023).
We know they meant the New York Wing of the Civil Air Patrol, etc. etc but that's not the way it comes out. I've seen MOU's and state statutes written in the same manner.
I don't know about "branding" or Brazil, etc." but I do know about the issues that were referenced in our request.
NC
Finally have heard a "good" reason for changing the name, and hence uniforms, of our organization. Makes sense to me. Have already started using the new
U.S. Civil Air Patrol tapes. Thanks Iowa Wing! :)
CapTALK Members,
I owe RougeLeader an apology. I firmly believed he was the sole reason for the leak of information from the Iowa Wing.
After our WTA this past weekend, I learned this was indeed not true at all.
I am sorry.
JM aka CPG
Thank you CadetProgramGuy, I know how hard you work to improve IAWG and CAP. I try to do the same, we just have different ideas of how to do it. I was wondering what happened this month at the WTA
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 26, 2007, 07:10:10 PM
Thank you CadetProgramGuy, I know how hard you work to improve IAWG and CAP. I try to do the same, we just have different ideas of how to do it. I was wondering what happened this month at the WTA
New Class of OTS, Some Cadet Training, CP had an informal long term schedule set so we can plan for the future.
We had a marginal turn out, however we have multiples of cadets off to Encampments at this time.
July will bring members absent to NBB, IACE, ect....
Is the next ES academy starting in July again?
Quote from: RogueLeader on June 26, 2007, 07:57:20 PM
Is the next ES academy starting in July again?
Correct
Is there anyplace that one could find specific information about the syllabus of the weekends? What all do people who are past the OTS stage do (other than obviously teach the newbies)? If someone wanted to either develop this idea for their own wing or gp or at least be able to talk coherently about it, where would they get enough information to not have to reinvent the wheel from scratch? Any help or information would be greatly appreciated.
Incidentally (or is that coincidentally?), our group is about the size of IA wing.
Quote from: floridacyclist on July 02, 2007, 07:22:41 PM
Is there anyplace that one could find specific information about the syllabus of the weekends?
The attached FAQ may answer your questions. If not, post specific questions or feel free to e-mail me at ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov
NC
Thank you sir, I'd read that before and found it pretty informative. I guess what I'm looking for are ops orders and lesson plans, schedules etc. Not saying that we'd shamelessly steal from you (not that I think you'd mind), but I am also very curious as to how much time you are allotting for the individual subjects and how they all fit together in coherent weekends as I'm finding myself more and more in a training and curriculum-development role.
I guess you could say that at this point, I am very much in fact-finding mode. To be honest, I was looking at Greyhound and airline schedules last night trying to figure out if it would be feasible to visit one of your weekends, and was even figuring how far off our route you'd be on our next Summer's bike ride.
What you're doing intrigues me as we are facing some of the same issues this approach purportedly addresses. I can't say that we'll adopt it or not; I'm not high enough up the food chain (I only recently added the Group CC to my cellphone's contact list :) ). I just know that when I mentioned earlier that our group was about the same size as your wing, I was thinking people-wise. I just measured it on Delorme, and we are right at 300 miles from corner to corner, so we're pretty doggone close size-wise too. I think at the very least it could make for some interesting discussions on Group Staff.
It would be interesting to see how this would apply to a group. I was recently asked by the Group Commander to develop a Group-centered GSAR training program to run for several months, one weekend a month; we are also planning a Group ICS weekend in September and the Group CC also mentioned that he was planning simultaneous aircrew and mission base training to go along with the GSAR program.
It wouldn't take much imagination to see these monthly weekend training sessions being stretched to cover CP, PD and a host of other 2-letter acronyms. On a different note, our squadron has already implemented pipelining starting with our next open house in Sep, and if it works I would think that other squadrons might follow suit.
Don't forget our intent was to not create anything new. We simply packaged the material to fit. All of the OTS stuff is right out of the professional development track. The ICS stuff is straight out of FEMA, and the ES stuff is the National ES program.
Now your question also included post OTS.
Level two is just the beginning, we still have CLC, More advanced ES training, and the WTA gives us the opportunity to have staff meetings, and specialty track development.
Ill see if I can drum up some weekend schedules to post.
Maj Jansen sent me a couple of sample schedules and a lot of it is a lot clearer now, but I wouldn't want to take on the task of creating that schedule from scratch LOL
How do you determine who is in what track? Some of them are pretty obvious (staff, OTS etc) but how about the others?
Members get to go to which ever program fits their needs at the time. As you said some of it is straight forward.
I need this class, or program to advance X specialty.
Other times you get busy staff work done. Its nice to have all of the staff officers updating files, pouting out policies,a nd the other minotinous administrative work.
And finally I pop in occasionally to see how the other half lives. I will sit in on a cadet programs group, or a pilot seminar.
Overall lots of bang for my CAP buck.
Iowa Wing is back on the job. After two weeks of intensive flying in support of Operation Iowa Flag, Iowa Wing is now supporting flood relief efforts in Iowa. Yesterday it was photo recon in North Central Iowa. Last night storms dropped lots of rain on Southern Iowa and has created trouble. Iowa CAP is still at the State Emergency Operations Center and is launching crews this morning to help the State see the extent of the problem in Wapello, Appanoose, and Wayne counties.
What's planned for this WTA, Second half of the ES academy? If so, provided opsec isn't involved, do some of the sorties include flying those photo recon?
A big focus of the WTA this weekend is the operations portion of the ES Academy. We have completed our operational photo recon taskings in hand. Unless new ones develop we will not fly them. If we did get taskings we would separate the real-world op from the training op since they come from two sources with different monies and insurance. MOWG is sending an aircrew up to support the training op and stood ready to send more up if our real-world work got busier.
Cool. Good luck and fly safe. Btw, during night ops, it's not funny to surprise the Lt that is about to find you. . . . You almost gave me a heart attack.
PS, hope you don't get the Expedition stuck again. . . .I still have the pics ;)
[blackmail] ah yes the popular expedition pics.......[/blackmail]
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;DNot MY fault he got stuck, though I did offer to help get him out. . . . ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
rather than start another iowa thread...
here you go.
Iowa Man Missing After Crash
(WASHINGTON, Iowa) An Iowa man is missing after a single-vehicle accident in northeast Washington County.
The accident happened around 7 p.m. on Sunday. The driver is believed to be 19-year-old Phililip Charles Kron of Riverside, Iowa.
Kron didn't show up for class on Monday, and the sheriff's department is looking for him because they're concerned about his welfare.
Kron is 6 feet 2 inches tall and weighs approximately 170 pounds. He's a white male with brown hair and eyes, with a cross tattoo on his left shoulder. He was last seen wearing his military uniform.
There are no charges pending against Kron. If you have any information about his whereabouts, you should call the Washington County Sheriff's Department at (319) 653-2107 or 1-800-TIPS-492.
http://www.ktvotv3.com/ (http://www.ktvotv3.com/)
Iowa News
Body of Riverside man found near crash site
August 29, 2007 08:41 EDT
RIVERSIDE, Iowa (AP) -- Eastern Iowa officials say the body of a Riverside man reported missing earlier this week has been found.
Authorities believe 19-year-old Phillip Kron was involved in a car wreck Sunday night in northwest Washington County. A search began on Monday when Kron didn't show up for classes at Kirkwood Community College in Cedar Rapids
The sheriff's office says deputies found his body last night near the crash site. An autopsy is pending.
This search was initiated on Sunday evening.
Tudesday AM local authorities processed a request to the state of Iowa for assistance. The Civil Air Patrol was requested initially for search management support. Lt Col Halbrook arrived on the scene assisted with incident command, and processed requests for Communications, and aircraft support. Air branch was coordinated with the Iowa State Troopers who's FLIR unit arrived on scene first. When the troopers finished their scan of the area CAP relieved them, and flew until the subject was recovered.
Col. Ralph Tomlinson is approaching the end of his command. Even though he was not "one of Tony's boys" he has survived his entire tour.
The North Central Region CC has announced that applications are being taken for the position.
From what you guys know of Iowa how will this affect our progress, and what should the region CC consider when selecting our new leader.
Our situation is much different than when Ralph took office. We need to be selective on who gets the nomination, and then the final selection.
What kind of input do we get in this process?
In addition to qualifications for CC I wonder what their expectations are especially given the progress the IAWG has made.
You don't get any input into the process, and that is mostly what is wrong with the paradigm.
Quote from: Skyray on August 31, 2007, 02:44:30 PM
You don't get any input into the process, and that is mostly what is wrong with the paradigm.
Maybe there sould be a change in the process.
thanks for hijacking my question.
give me a call I don't have your current phone number
I think one main factor is the new CC HAS to have a good relationship with the Iowa Guard and the State. That relationship has enabled the Wing to move forward as it has to date and brought in the good missions.
In his infamous letter to the Board back on 10 May 2006, Rex Glasgow promised to post some dissembling phone conversations and correspondence from the National Commander. Any of you denizens of Iowa know if he ever did that, and if so, what is the URL?
sorry.
No such information
I really like your "corn field" scenario. If you have the assets, a single line abreast across the entire field is what I would recommend. Two foot, or every row, track spacing would take a bunch of people.
Quote from: isuhawkeye on August 31, 2007, 02:32:11 PM
Col. Ralph Tomlinson is approaching the end of his command. Even though he was not "one of Tony's boys" he has survived his entire tour.
The North Central Region CC has announced that applications are being taken for the position.
From what you guys know of Iowa how will this affect our progress, and what should the region CC consider when selecting our new leader.
I think you or Cyclone would do a good job of it. Both of you are well versed in the way IAWG works with the NG, as well as has good operational skills. You might want the Admin/personnel Capt from 043 as Chief of Staff, he's very good with making the system work.
cyclone and I are both very involved in work, and LtCol Critelli has not had enough time to get his law practice in order for him to devote to the position.
with that said.....
we have a number of staff who meet the requirments.
what advise would you have for them as they go to apply
Continue to build cohesion within the wing.
Enhance your cadet program.
Strengthen the bonds forges with the Guard & state government.
Remember to treat every cadet and officer the way you'd want to be treated yourself.
Watch your six!!! (especially when dealing with region & national!)
recycle Rex.
Quote from: isuhawkeye on September 02, 2007, 03:18:41 PM
we have a number of staff who meet the requirments.
My question is this:
What are the requirements to be Wing CC? Between CAP requirements and IAWG specific requirements?
I have a short list of those who I think would be awesome in the role, another list that would be OK, and another list of those IF they get the slot, I am looking elsewhere.
Quote from: CadetProgramGuy on September 02, 2007, 05:17:29 PM
Quote from: isuhawkeye on September 02, 2007, 03:18:41 PM
we have a number of staff who meet the requirments.
My question is this:
What are the requirements to be Wing CC? Between CAP requirements and IAWG specific requirements?
I have a short list of those who I think would be awesome in the role, another list that would be OK, and another list of those IF they get the slot, I am looking elsewhere.
If Bowling sends Pineda up there to "straighten out the Wing" you had better duck and run. Sad experience from Florida.
Level III complete, and preferably a major.
Unless I am mistaken those are the only requirements. The states have no say, and th membership has little say.
It all depends upon how the region CC sets up the selection board
Quote from: isuhawkeye on September 02, 2007, 06:22:50 PM
Level III complete, and preferably a major.
Unless I am mistaken those are the only requirements. The states have no say, and th membership has little say.
It all depends upon how the region CC sets up the selection board
There has been over the years discussion of a requirement of a tour as a Safety Officer. When I was being groomed, Bill Tallent informally told me to take a wing staff job to learn what was going on. I became the Wing Safety Officer because of the imminence of this requirement. Whatever happened to it?
Quote from: CAPR 5-4, SECTION B – WING COMMANDER SELECTION PROCESS
3. These suggested guidelines are designed to assist region commanders in carrying out this responsibility in a timely, judicious manner and to standardize the selection process. The final decision concerning selection still rests with the region commander concerned. A suggested timeline is shown in figure 1.
4. Minimum qualifications for consideration as wing commander are:
a. Hold at least the CAP grade of major.
b. Completed Level IV of the Senior Member Training Program.
c. Three years command and staff experience at any level within a wing.
d. Budget and asset acquisition knowledge gained within or outside CAP.
e. Five years supervisory experience gained within or outside CAP.
f. Five years total CAP membership with no less than three continuous years of service prior to appointment.
g. Prior to appointment as wing commander, individual must complete a successful fingerprint rescreening.
Note, some of the emphasis is mine (bold). At the end of the day, the Region CC is still free to appoint whomever he/she wants, pending board approval of the selectee.
Quote from: isuhawkeye on September 02, 2007, 06:22:50 PM
Level III complete, and preferably a major.
Unless I am mistaken those are the only requirements. The states have no say, and th membership has little say.
It all depends upon how the region CC sets up the selection board
The states do have a say! I personally knew two Officers who were appointed to command New Hampshire Wing in NER who were rejected by the State because while they were or had been members of the Wing both had residences just over the State line. (I believe the state may have threatened to withhold apropriations).
Quote from: isuhawkeye on September 02, 2007, 06:22:50 PM
Level III complete, and preferably a major.
Unless I am mistaken those are the only requirements. The states have no say, and the membership has little say.
It all depends upon how the region CC sets up the selection board
If that is the case, I have identifed 9 individuals that fit the criteria. The other 29 Major or higher are non participants (inactive)
Of these 9, I support 2 fully, would tolerate 3, and reconsider my membership over the final 4.
Unfortunately the criteria for wing CC appointment are only 'guidelines'...ultimately it comes down to whomever the region CC wants....Gen Pineda, I understand, took a very active role in filling wing CC slots....what Gen Courter will do in this regard remains to be seen.
We need a system with some built in checks and balances to ensure an objective, impartial selection based on what is best for CAP & the wing concerned.
There ought to be some sort of screening board consisting of former wing & region CCs, and some retired USAF officers & senior NCOs, identifying individuals who would be considered "qualified & eligible". Only CAP officers on such a list could apply for wing CC openings or be appointed as wing CC.
The criteria need to be more stringent than the current guidelines, in terms of CAP professional development, tenure of membership, and depth of experience.
we've talked a little about the people, and the way those people are selected.
I would challenge you with the fact that this command change is not about people, but it is about ideas.
The Iowa program is a departure from the norm within CAP. We have shaken certain aspects of CAP from top to bottom.
The Iowa Wing has rethought recruiting, new member training, operational support to our state, and a mission tasking model.
This command change is not simply a the support or rejection of individuals. This command change is support or rejection of a concept.
CAP is in a transition. Across the country we have an identity crisis. we have hashed out those different identities many times in this forum. The North Central Region Commander, and our acting National Commander have a choice to make. Will CAP define itself as a functional cadet program with an active response centered ES program, or will we continue to be lost.
The appointment of the Iowa wing CC will send a clear message as to the future of our organisation.
This will be general courtiers first appointment. I look forward to seeing her vision for the future of CAP.
Hawkeye:
QuoteThis will be general courtiers first appointment. I look forward to seeing her vision for the future of CAP.
I beg to differ. It is not her appointment. Interference with the Region Commander's prerogatives is what caused Bowling to get Bergman relieved as National Commander and demoted to Colonel at the 1998 Summer Boards. I am not supposed to know that, because it was all done in secret at a conclave similar to the old Star Chamber. Board members at the time will recall what went down, and it is none of your business how I know.
Certainly, concurrence by the National Commander is a strong political concern. I would hope that General Courter will concur or object on the basis of what is good for CAP. From what I have seen of her actions thus far, her personal advancement has little to do with her decision making process, unlike some high level leaders we have had in the immediate past.
Ladies & Gentlemen,
Can one single thread continue on this site without gratuitous and repeat diversions of the thread about Iowa Wing into General Pineda and other related conspiracy theories?
The mod staff will allow another discussion thread to be started again because the topic of Iowa Wing and its future warrants serious and professionally-minded discussion. If you feel you have something of professional value related to Iowa Wing, feel free to create such a discussion topic. In the meantime, think about how you can keep it from getting locked again.